ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2025
Caregiver experiences of accessing a child developmental assessment service in a culturally diverse population in Australia: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Associated with Extreme Waiting Times for Child Developmental Diagnostic Assessments: A Mixed-Methods Service Evaluation in Sydney.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Transitioning to a Flexible, Tiered, Developmentally Informed Same-Day Screening Model for Preschoolers in Low-Resource Settings.Child: care, health and development · 2026Observational
- Overmedicalisation of childhood: what paediatricians and child health professionalsBMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- Brain Neurotrophins and Plant Polyphenols: A Powerful Connection.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile there is a high level of concern among parents about waiting for child developmental services, there is limited research on caregiver perspectives on accessing public developmental diagnostic services, especially for families from culturally diverse backgrounds. We aimed to explore caregiver perspectives and satisfaction after attending a Child Developmental Assessment Service (CDAS) appointment for their child in South Western Sydney, as part of a large quality improvement project.
methodsOver a 6-month period between June and December 2022, we surveyed caregivers after their child's first CDAS appointment, using an adapted caregiver questionnaire that contained Likert scale and free-text responses. We analysed the data using simple descriptive and thematic data analysis.
resultsOf 107 caregiver satisfaction questionnaires completed, almost two-thirds (63%) were from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Over 90% caregivers reported a satisfaction response of 'Agree' to 'Strongly Agree', 88% felt that the assessment was suitable to their child's needs and 85% considered waiting times reasonable. The mean overall caregiver satisfaction score was 4.5 (SD 1.1). About 30% of families had doubts about their child's neurodevelopmental diagnosis. The themes identified from free-text responses were (1) positive caregiver experience; (2) clinician attributes; (3) quality of the service delivery; (4) information received. Caregivers expressed very high levels of satisfaction with the quality of service and clinicians' skills, appreciated enhanced understanding of their child's development and found the assessment helpful.
conclusionsOur study showed surprisingly high levels of caregiver satisfaction in attending a neurodevelopmental assessment service, in a culturally diverse metropolitan setting. Our findings support the importance of providing interpersonal sensitivity and family-centred practice for children with neurodevelopmental difficulties. We need to respond to the families who disagreed with the diagnostic formulation or were dissatisfied with the service, to improve the service quality, using longitudinal evaluation and more in-depth qualitative analysis.
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.