ArticleNIHR open research2024
Educational outcomes of children with major congenital anomalies: Study protocol for a population-based cohort study using linked hospital and education data from England.
Article in NIHR open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of special educational needs and disability provision in English primary schools using administrative health and education data in the ECHILD database.International journal of population data science · 2026Article
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
Background: Major congenital anomalies (CAs) affect around 2% of live births and are a primary cause of infant mortality, childhood morbidity and long-term disability, often requiring hospitalisation and/or surgery. Children with CAs are at greater risk of lower educational attainment compared with their peers, which could be due to learning disabilities, higher rates of ill-health and school absences, or lack of adequate educational support. Our study will compare the educational attainment of children with CAs to those of their peers up to age 11 in England, using linked administrative health and education data. Methods: We will analyse data from the ECHILD (Education and Child Health Insights from Linked Data) database. Children born in NHS-funded hospitals from 1st September 2003 to 31st August 2008 whose hospital records were linked to their educational records at three Key Stages (ages 4/5, 6/7 and 10/11 years) will be included. Children with different CAs, indicated by recorded hospital diagnosis codes, will be compared to children without CAs. We will compare the proportions of enrolled children who take the assessment, the proportions who reached national expected levels of attainment, and the mean standardised attainment scores for Maths and English at each Key Stage. We will describe variations in outcome by sex, ethnic minority background, region, and neighbourhood deprivation, and perform regression modelling to compare the attainment trajectories of children with and without CAs, controlling for sociodemographic factors. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval has been obtained for the analyses of the ECHILD database. Our findings will provide information for parents regarding their children's expected academic potential, and also enable the development of interventions to support those at risk of not doing well. We will disseminate our findings to academics, policy makers, service users and providers through seminars, peer-reviewed publications, conference abstracts and other media (lay summaries and infographics).
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.