ArticlePsychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law2025
Standardised capacity measures and cognition in the assessment of capacity in children and adolescents: a systematic review.
Article in Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While there is increasing use of standardised tools to assist in determining decision-making capacity in adults, there is limited literature evaluating these tools in children/adolescents. The current PRISMA guided systematic review aimed to evaluate standardised capacity assessment tools used in the child/adolescent population, and to examine the relationship between these capacity assessment tools and cognition. Inclusion criteria comprised: (1) validation of a new/existing tool to assess capacity or competence; (2) participants < 18 years; (3) involved validation on normative or non-normative populations; (4) published in English in a peer review journal. Ten studies were included. The majority applied a version of the Macarthur Competence Assessment Tool. Findings suggest capacity assessment tools demonstrate sound psychometric properties, but research into capacity assessment in children is still in its infancy. Limitations include the lack of diagnostic gold standard of capacity and the inconsistent and minimal incorporation of cognitive functioning into standardised capacity assessment.
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.