ArticleCoDAS2026
Home literacy practices for preschoolers: a scoping review.
Article in CoDAS, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo map studies describing family literacy practices carried out with pre-school children. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: Consultation of Lilacs, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, LiVIVO and gray literature databases. Registration on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform. Search strategies: "Child, Preschool", "home literacy", "Early Intervention Educational" and "Family". SELECTION CRITERIA: The acronym PCC was used: Population (Studies with preschoolers); Concept (family literacy practices); Context (family environment). DATA ANALYSIS: Two authors carried out the identification and extraction of data: authors, year of publication, population, objective and the family literacy practices carried out with preschoolers.
resultsFor the final synthesis of the scoping review, 29 studies were included. Informal practices appeared most frequently.
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.