Harnessing routinely collected data for the evaluation of early years interventions: insights from a scoping review of evaluation studies
Mooney, K. E.; Henderson, H.; Hollingsworth, K.; Blower, S.; Graham, J.; Davidson, R.; Batool, F.; Nielsen, D.
Show abstract
IntroductionRoutinely collected data (RCD) describes data about individuals that is documented routinely in practice, typically in electronic medical, educational, and service records and registries. Utilisation of RCD for research can overcome limitations with traditional study designs, such as participant burden, attrition and disappointment bias. A systematic understanding of if (and how) RCD is being used to evaluate early years interventions is lacking. ObjectivesTo scope the literature on how RCD is being used to evaluate the effectiveness of early years interventions being delivered in the UK. MethodsThe study protocol was registered online (osf.io/cug36). Included studies were interventions delivered to expectant parents and parents of children aged 0-5 years. Studies had to use a quantitative measure from RCD as an outcome. The study scope was limited to the UK, from January 2000 to November 2024. Completed studies and study protocols were eligible, encompassing both grey literature and peer reviewed sources. Medline, Psycinfo and Embase databases were searched via Ovid. Results31 unique studies published 2009-2024 had used or were planning to use RCD as an outcome in an evaluation of an early years intervention. Most studies measured more than one outcome type, and the most common were birth outcomes and child education. Many studies noted limitations of using RCD, particularly being limited by the measures available in RCD, and fewer noted strengths. ConclusionWhilst the use of RCD expands evaluation opportunities, researchers are limited by what measures are available in RCD. We make four specific recommendations to improve the use of RCD in early years evaluations. With careful consideration, RCD can provide powerful insights regarding the impacts of early years interventions. This scoping review reveals an emerging methodology that may have increasing importance for evaluating early years policies and interventions but remains constrained by data availability and quality.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A community-based mentoring scheme for pregnant and parenting adolescents in Sierra Leone: protocol for a hybrid pilot cluster randomised controlled trial 95%
- Protocol for a scoping review investigating success in research capacity building for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals 95%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Caregiver-mediated interventions to support self-regulation among infants and young children (0-5): A protocol for a realist review 95%
- A decade of Acceptability Research with Adolescents in Africa: Systematic review and evidence map 95%
- Implementation Science Protocol for a participatory, theory-informed implementation research programme in the context of health system strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET-ImplementER) 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparative analysis of policies and programs to support families and children during COVID-19 93%
- A whole system approach to increasing children’s physical activity in a multi-ethnic UK city: a process evaluation protocol 93%
- Development of the Kunonga Framework for Extending Approaches in Health Inequality and Inequity Evidence Syntheses 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Measures to assess quality of postnatal care: a scoping review 96%
- Economic evaluation of caregiver interventions for children with developmental disabilities: a scoping review 94%
- Assessing the impact of Covid-19 on Nurturing Care in Nairobi Slums: Findings from 5 rounds of cross-sectional telephone surveys 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effectiveness, implementation, and experiences of peer support approaches for mental health: a systematic umbrella review 94%
- The use and impact of surveillance-based technology initiatives in inpatient and acute mental health settings: A systematic review 91%
- Models of COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation: a systematic literature search and narrative review 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.