ArticleDevelopmental medicine and child neurology2025
Policy and practice recommendations for services for disabled children during emergencies: Learning from COVID-19.
Article in Developmental medicine and child neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-system resilience for disabled children and their families during crisis and emergency.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2025Article
- Policy and practice recommendations for services for disabled children during emergencies: Learning from COVID-19.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo seek consensus on recommendations for the delivery of services to disabled children in England during future emergencies.
methodCandidate recommendations were drafted based on our related mapping review and qualitative research related to experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Iterative workshops with professionals and parent carers helped to refine the recommendations. A Delphi survey, rating the importance of each recommendation, was conducted with (1) parent carers of disabled children, (2) disabled young people aged 8 to 19 years, and (3) health, education, and social care professionals. A consensus meeting was convened online to discuss the findings and ratify the recommendations.
resultsTwenty-eight recommendations were included in the Delphi survey. There were 141 participants in round 1 and 91 in round 2. Seven recommendations reached the agreed consensus criteria for being critical across all stakeholder groups, while 21 recommendations did not reach consensus across all groups. Fourteen participants ratified 23 recommendations, which when aggregated and refined further produced our final 19 recommendations.
interpretationReductions in services for disabled children and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic had serious and lasting consequences. This study enabled parent carers, disabled young people, and health, education, and social care professionals to agree recommendations on services for disabled children during future emergencies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.