ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Improving Access to Early Developmental Evaluation in Academic Primary Care Centers.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enigma of autism regression mechanistic pathways, clinical phenotypes, and early intervention implications.World journal of clinical pediatrics · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence, autism care, and health equity: a public health narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Developmental disorders (DDs) affect approximately 1 in 6 children in the United States. Early identification and treatment improve developmental outcomes and child and family functioning. Disparities exist in the diagnosis of DD that leads to inequitable access to developmental services during important periods of neuroplasticity. Improve access to the developmental and behavioral pediatrics (DBP) clinic for developmental evaluation when developmental delays occur among children 3-5 years of age by increasing the percentage of children scheduled for and completing an initial visit in 90 days from 20% to 40%. Methods: We used the Institute of Health Improvement model, executed mapping failure modes, created a key driver diagram and conducted plan-do-study-act cycles. We plotted data over time in a statistical control chart. The key intervention was an expedited, collaborative referral and scheduling process developed, tested, and implemented by the general pediatric clinic and DBP stakeholders. Additional interventions included reminder notifications and calls to patients who missed appointments. Results: The percentage of patients referred to DBP who scheduled and completed their initial visit in DBP within 90 days increased from 20% to 40%. DBP clinicians suspecting that patients had global developmental delay and/or autism spectrum disorder at the initial DBP visit referred them for more extensive developmental testing with psychology and speech-language providers. Conclusions: Access to developmental evaluation for preschool-aged children at risk for delayed diagnosis and treatment was improved using quality improvement methodology focused on flexible and creative priority scheduling practices from within the medical home.
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.