ArticleBMJ open2025
Ages of sitting and walking milestone attainment in typically developing children worldwide: protocol for a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAges of attainment for early gross motor milestones have been widely studied, but definitions and measurement methods have varied greatly. Since delays in motor milestones have been used extensively as one of the earliest indicators of atypical development, it is imperative to establish a universal understanding of the methods and results reported on motor milestones in typically developing children. Therefore, the primary aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of recent studies reporting ages of onset for independent sitting and walking in typically developing children worldwide; this will be achieved by summarising how these milestones have been operationalised and evaluated, the samples from whom these data have been drawn, and the reported ages of acquisition. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To meet inclusion criteria, articles must: be original research papers published in any language since 2003, contain a sample of typically developing children and report actual ages of onset for independent sitting and/or walking. To conduct this scoping review, the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework will be used. Search terms will include variations of the following concepts: acquisition of motor milestone (independent sitting and/or walking), age of onset, infancy. Six databases (CINAHL Plus, Embase, PsycNet: PsycINFO & PsycArticles, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science: Core Collection) will be searched. Records from these databases will be screened for eligibility. Two people will independently review each record during title and abstract screening, and three people will independently screen full texts and extract data. Results will be displayed in tables, graphs and narrative summaries in the scoping review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As the review will only include previously published data, ethics approval is not required. Findings will be shared at scientific conferences and in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.