ArticleAutism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research2026
Defining and Measuring Developmental Regression During Childhood: A Scoping Review.
Article in Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 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.
- Defining and Measuring Developmental Regression During Childhood: A Scoping Review.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Developmental regression during childhood is inconsistently defined and measured, resulting in delayed diagnostic discovery and intervention. This study aimed to examine published definitions and measures for developmental regression. A comprehensive search strategy was applied to Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and PsycINFO databases. Reviewers independently screened relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews. The number and percentages of definition use, their primary features, and measures were reported. Of 19,099 potential publications, 157 were included. Thematic analysis identified four condition groups: Neurodevelopmental disorders (n = 118); Progressive neurodegenerative conditions (n = 17); Developmental epileptic encephalopathies (n = 8); and Genetic conditions (n = 14). Most studies (n = 124, 79.0%) used an operational definition, and most specified types of skills lost (n = 147, 93.6%). Age of onset was specified in 67.5% (n = 106), and duration was specified in 34.4% (n = 54). Measures designed to specifically assess developmental regression were infrequently used (n = 5, 3.2%). We concluded that developmental regression is inconsistently defined and measured. A consistent approach is vital to ensure that all children are identified as early as possible. This will allow timely diagnostic discovery, enhance research rigor, and promote the collaboration that is needed to advance our understanding of causal mechanisms and effective interventions for affected children and their families.
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.