ArticleAcademic pediatrics
Developmental Foundations of a Pediatric Mental Health Risk Calculator for Young Children.
Article in Academic pediatrics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo advance the clinical utility of an emerging risk calculator for identifying when to worry and when to act when young children show signs of mental health concerns in pediatric care, we 1) replicate an early childhood mental health risk algorithm (DECIDE); 2) determine the preliminary predictive utility of additional child and parenting assets, advancing a strengths-based framework to reduce the likelihood of biased identification.
methodsData were from 2 independent studies: the national Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS; N = 2763) and the regional Mental Health, Earlier Synthetic Cohort study (MHESC; N = 323). Predictors were assessed in toddlerhood/early preschool age. Internalizing/externalizing problems were measured in older preschoolers, serving as outcomes. Epidemiologic risk prediction methods were applied to 1) replicate the DECIDE risk algorithm domains comprised of demographics, child irritability, and adverse childhood experiences; 2) examine the added predictive utility of child and parenting assets. Predictive utility was based on area under the curve (AUC) and/or the integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).
resultsThe DECIDE algorithm was replicated in FFCWS and MHESC (AUC = 0.70 for both studies; IDI = 0.07 in FFCWS and 0.06 in MHESC). IDIs indicated predictive utility for child assets beyond the existing DECIDE algorithm in both studies, and for parenting assets in FFCWS.
conclusionsRobust validation of predictive algorithms is critical for assessing generalizability. Reducing bias in early mental health risk algorithms via a strengths-based approach is key to equitable decision-making. This work lays the foundation for implementation of early mental health decision tools in routine care of young children.
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.