ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
Lessons learned from a door-to-door screening program for developmental delay and motor impairment in children in Cuenca, Ecuador.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lessons learned from a door-to-door screening program for developmental delay and motor impairment in children in Cuenca, Ecuador.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChildren with neurodevelopmental conditions in low-resource urban settings often remain undiagnosed and excluded from care. Reliable epidemiological data is crucial for addressing this issue, but in Ecuador, official data are limited. To address this, an door-to-door screening survey was carried out in an urban area of Cuenca, Ecuador. This paper reviews the lessons learned when implementing epidemiological research in a mobile and economically vulnerable population.
methodsThe original project was a cross-sectional, door-to-door survey conducted across 134 city blocks to screen children aged 2 to 59 months for developmental delay and those aged 5 to 12 years for motor impairment. Following project completion, a structured reflective evaluation was undertaken to analyze the encountered challenges. This review drew on meeting records, follow-up data, and a targeted literature review to identify implementation barriers and develop recommendations for future community-based screening initiatives.
resultsThe analysis revealed a critical weakness in the original study’s design. A six-month delay between screening and diagnoses combined with high population mobility drove a 31–65% loss to follow-up between stages. Additional challenges included a lack of treatment pathways for participants, limited institutional support, and undeveloped soft skills of the student researchers. Strengths included reaching many unregistered children with disabilities, effective household mapping, and valuable experiential learning for medical students.
conclusionsThis study underscores the importance of aligning methodological design with sociocultural realities. Programs should ensure robust institutional commitments, implement study stages concurrently, and integrate treatment into the research protocol to improve participant retention. Community-based screening initiatives can serve as meaningful training experiences for health science students.
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.