scholarly journals A systematic review and meta-analysis of effects of early life non-cognitive skills on academic, psychosocial, cognitive and health outcomes

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (11) ◽  
pp. 867-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa G. Smithers ◽  
Alyssa C. P. Sawyer ◽  
Catherine R. Chittleborough ◽  
Neil M. Davies ◽  
George Davey Smith ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa G. Smithers ◽  
Alyssa C. P. Sawyer ◽  
Catherine R. Chittleborough ◽  
Neil Davies ◽  
George Davey Smith ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundSuccess in school and the labour market is due to more than just high intelligence. Associations between traits such as attention, self-regulation, and perseverance in childhood, and later outcomes have been investigated by psychologists, economists, and epidemiologists. Such traits have been loosely referred to as “non-cognitive” skills. There has been no attempt to systematically assess the relative importance of non-cognitive skills in early life on later outcomes.MethodsThe systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42013006566) in December 2013. We systematically reviewed electronic databases covering psychology, education, health and economics for articles published from database conception until September 2015. Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility, and from eligible articles data was extracted on study design, sample type and size, age of participants at exposure and outcome, loss to follow up, measurement of exposure and outcome, type of intervention and comparison group, confounding adjustment and results. Where possible we extracted a standardised effect size. We reviewed all studies and rated their evidence quality as ‘better, weak, or poor’ on the basis of study design and potential for confounding, selection and measurement bias.ResultsWe reviewed 375 studies and provided interpretation of results from 142 (38%) better quality studies comprising randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental, fixed effects including twin studies, longitudinal and some cross-sectional designs that made reasonable attempts to control confounding. In the academic achievement category outcomes were reported in 78 publications of better quality studies which were consistent with 0.1-0.2 SD effects.Psychosocial outcomes were reported in 65 better quality studies consistent with effects of 0.3-0.4 SD. For the language and cognitive category there were 42 publications reporting better quality studies consistent with effects of 0.3-0.4 SD. For physical health, results across only eight better quality studies were inconsistent but centred around zero. Analysis of funnel plots consistently showed asymmetric distributions, raising the potential of small study bias which may inflate these observed effects.ConclusionsThe evidence under-pinning the importance of non-cognitive skills for life success is diverse and inconsistent. Nevertheless, there is tentative evidence from published studies that non-cognitive skills associate with modest improvements in academic achievement, psychosocial, and language and cognitive outcomes with effects in the range of 0.2-0.4 SD. The quality of evidence under-pinning this field is generally low with more than a third of studies making little or no attempt to control even the most basic confounding (endogeneity) bias. The evidence could be improved by adequately powering studies, and using procedures and tools that improve the conduct and reporting of RCTs and observational studies. Interventions designed to develop children’s non-cognitive skills could potentially improve opportunities, particularly for disadvantaged children. The inter-disciplinary researchers interested in these skills should take a more rigorous approach to determine which interventions are most effective.


2020 ◽  
Vol 218 ◽  
pp. 166-177.e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liel N. Cohn ◽  
Petros Pechlivanoglou ◽  
Yuna Lee ◽  
Sanjay Mahant ◽  
Julia Orkin ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e043722
Author(s):  
Naomi Priest ◽  
Kate Doery ◽  
Mandy Truong ◽  
Shuaijun Guo ◽  
Ryan Perry ◽  
...  

IntroductionRacism is a critical determinant of health and health inequities for children and youth. This protocol aims to update the first systematic review conducted by Priest et al (2013), including a meta-analysis of findings. Based on previous empirical data, it is anticipated that child and youth health will be negatively impacted by racism. Findings from this review will provide updated evidence of effect sizes across outcomes and identify moderators and mediators of relationships between racism and health.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies that examine associations between experiences of racism and racial discrimination with health outcomes of children and youth aged 0–24 years. Exposure measures include self-reported or proxy reported systemic, interpersonal and intrapersonal racism. Outcome measures include general health and well-being, physical health, mental health, biological markers, healthcare utilisation and health behaviours. A comprehensive search of studies from the earliest time available to October 2020 will be conducted. A random effects meta-analysis will examine the average effect of racism on a range of health outcomes. Study-level moderation will test the difference in effect sizes with regard to various sample and exposure characteristics. This review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.Ethics and disseminationThis review will provide evidence for future research within the field and help to support policy and practice development. Results will be widely disseminated to both academic and non-academic audiences through peer-review publications, community summaries and presentations to research, policy, practice and community audiences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184055.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e042212
Author(s):  
Hamish Foster ◽  
Peter Polz ◽  
Frances Mair ◽  
Jason Gill ◽  
Catherine A O'Donnell

IntroductionCombinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors are strongly associated with mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. It is unclear how socioeconomic status (SES) affects those associations. Lower SES groups may be disproportionately vulnerable to the effects of unhealthy lifestyle factors compared with higher SES groups via interactions with other factors associated with low SES (eg, stress) or via accelerated biological ageing. This systematic review aims to synthesise studies that examine how SES moderates the association between lifestyle factor combinations and adverse health outcomes. Greater understanding of how lifestyle risk varies across socioeconomic spectra could reduce adverse health by (1) identifying novel high-risk groups or targets for future interventions and (2) informing research, policy and interventions that aim to support healthy lifestyles in socioeconomically deprived communities.Methods and analysisThree databases will be searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL) from inception to March 2020. Reference lists, citations and grey literature will also be searched. Inclusion criteria are: (1) prospective cohort studies; (2) investigations of two key exposures: (a) lifestyle factor combinations of at least three lifestyle factors (eg, smoking, physical activity and diet) and (b) SES (eg, income, education or poverty index); (3) an assessment of the impact of SES on the association between combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and health outcomes; (4) at least one outcome from—mortality (all cause, CVD and cancer), CVD or cancer incidence. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full texts of included studies. Data extraction will focus on cohort characteristics, exposures, direction and magnitude of SES effects, methods and quality (via Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). If appropriate, a meta-analysis, pooling the effects of SES, will be performed. Alternatively, a synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication, professional networks, social media and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020172588.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 439-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Aghaali ◽  
Seyed Saeed Hashemi-Nazari

Abstract Background Recent studies have shown that antibiotic exposure during infancy is associated with increased body mass in healthy children. This study was performed to investigate the association between early-life antibiotic exposure and risk of childhood obesity. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to comprehensively and quantitatively determine the association between early antibiotic exposure and risk of childhood obesity. Various databases such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, Cochrane and Google Scholar were searched. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool the statistical estimates. Additionally, a subgroup analysis was performed based on the time of follow-up. Results Nineteen studies involving at least 671,681 participants were finally included. Antibiotic exposure in early life was significantly associated with risk of childhood weight gain and obesity (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04–1.06). Conclusions Antibiotic exposure in early life significantly increases the risk of childhood weight gain and obesity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document