ArticleMaternal and child health journal2026
Lessons Learned from Evaluation of the Convergent Validity the SPARK36 in Preventive Youth Health Care: Implications for Further Research and Practice.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSPARK36 is a structured interview tool for nurse-led consultations with parents of 3-year-olds in Youth Health Care. Previous studies demonstrated its feasibility, reliability and known-groups validity. This study examined its convergent validity.
methodsIn a cross-sectional study during the COVID-19 period, associations between scores on 12 SPARK36 domains and conceptually related subscales of three parent-reported instruments were explored. Correlations were assessed using Kendall's Tau-C.
resultsOf the 599 parents of children attending a SPARK36 consultation, 286 (41.7%) did not return a questionnaire. These parents more often had lower educational levels, non-Belgian nationalities, less often spoke Dutch at home, and more often showed increased or high risk based on the SPARK36 (19.9% vs. 13.7% respectively; p = 0.04), indicating potential selection bias. None of 32 tested correlation coefficients (e.g., SPARK36 'child behavior' with SDQ scales) exceeded 0.20. CONCLUSION FOR PRACTICE: Convergent validity could not be demonstrated possibly due to the overall response rate, selective non-reporting, and the fact that most children showed no developmental or parenting problems. Three lessons emerged: (1) equity challenges occur, when parent-report tools are used among higher-risk families; (2) ongoing support may be needed to ensure consistent data collection by the nurses, given the large variation in data collection across them; (3) crisis situations disturb data collection, though a 50% questionnaires response rate may still be achievable during adverse contexts. The lessons also suggest that interview formats like SPARK36 may help reduce inequities that arise when preventive care relies on parent-report questionnaires.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41569309What 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.