ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Screening young children for neurodevelopmental differences in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. 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.
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
backgroundNeurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) present in approximately 10% of children globally. Awareness of NDDs in sub-Saharan Africa is relatively low and little is known about prevalence. This scoping review aims to understand screening of NDDs in young children in sub-Saharan Africa, which NDDs are screened for, and who administers screening.
methodsThe review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR standards for scoping reviews. PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS and PsycInfo were searched according to a defined search strategy with relevant keywords. Studies published in English between 2012 and 2023, where children aged ≥ 2 to < 9 years years, residing in sub-Saharan Africa, were screened for a form of NDD, were included. Due to the flexible nature of a scoping review and its focus on under-explored topics, there were no restrictions on study design. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for selection independently by three researchers and full text articles independently by two researchers. Quality assessment was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
resultsAfter duplicate removal and title and abstract screening, 546 abstracts were retained for full text review. Twelve publications met the inclusion criteria. These were from South Africa (n = 6), Kenya (n = 3), Uganda (n = 2) and Malawi (n = 1). Only two explicitly screened for multiple NDDs. There was considerable heterogeneity in NDD conceptualisation, study design, screener design, populations of children screened, and persons performing the screening – limiting the possibility for valid comparative analysis. Quality assessment of methodologies yielded ratings ranging from “Very good” to “Unsatisfactory” (cross-sectional studies) and “Good” to “Fair” (cohort- and case-control studies).
conclusionThere are very few published studies on NDD screening in young children in sub-Saharan Africa. Further research examining simple, contextually appropriate screening for a wide range of NDDs amongst this group, is needed. This may inform future screening programmes, policy development and clinical practice throughout the region.
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.