MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416333327 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.13.25340081

Creation of a tool for the Identification of Neurodevelopmental Disabilities to Improve Global Outcomes (INDIGO) in children aged 0-3 years in Malawi, Pakistan and Uganda – feasibility of implementation and diagnostic accuracy

2025· preprint· W4416333327 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Gladstone, Gareth McCray, Harriet M. Babikako, Muneera A. Rasheed, E. Stockdale, Parkash Chand, Emmie Mbale, Limbika Maliwichi, Paul Lynch, Kieran Bromley, Amina Abubakar, Heather Kitt, Kirsten A. Donald, Meta van den Heuvel, Helen Nabwera, Gillian Lancaster

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsSocioemotional selectivity theoryIdentification (biology)Gold standard (test)Protocol (science)Resource (disambiguation)Inclusion (mineral)Culturally appropriateMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Over 50 million children under five have disabilities, the majority residing in resource-limited settings. Many children with neurodevelopmental disabilities (NDDs) remain undetected due to lack of culturally appropriate tools for identification. This study aimed to develop and evaluate the feasibility of the Identification of Neurodevelopmental Disabilities to Improve Global Outcomes (INDIGO) tool to identify NDDs in children aged 0 −3 years. Methods A systematic approach was used to construct the INDIGO tool. First, 114 items of the Malawi Developmental Assessment Tool (MDAT) were mapped onto the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health for Children and Youth (ICF-CY). Gaps were identified leading to review of 2,158 items from existing tools. After consensus, 59 additional items (28 existing, 31 newly created) were incorporated, ensuring comprehensive coverage of ICF-CY domains. The preliminary INDIGO tool (203 items) was pilot tested in Uganda, Malawi and Pakistan with a gold standard assessment protocol developed to validate diagnostic accuracy. Feasibility outcomes including recruitment, diagnostic accuracy, cultural applicability and practical implementation were assessed. Items with over 80% diagnostic accuracy were retained for the final INDIGO prototype. Results A total of 425 children (151 Malawi, 145 Pakistan, 129 Uganda) were assessed using both INDIGO and gold standard evaluation. The feasibility study highlighted challenges in recruiting younger children with behavioural or socioemotional conditions and difficulties assessing sensory impairment due to resource constraints. Despite challenges, 99 high performing items were selected for the final INDIGO prototype emphasizing diagnostic accuracy, feasibility and cultural neutrality. Conclusions The INDIGO tool is a novel, rigorously developed instrument designed for early detection of NDDs in children 0-3 years in LMICs. By integrating a broad range of developmental domains, INDIGO addressed key limitations of existing tools. Future large-scale validation and implementation studies are needed to assess its effectiveness in routine child health surveillance programmes. Key Messages What is already known on this topic Most existing developmental screening tools used globally are not culturally adapted for LMICs, require specialized training, and fail to comprehensively assess structural, functional, and environmental factors important for detecting NDDs in early childhood. What this study adds This study presents the development and feasibility testing of the INDIGO tool, a novel screening instrument for identifying moderate to severe NDDs in children under 3 years in resource-limited settings, incorporating items to assess structural anomalies, sensory impairments, and participation, offering a more holistic and contextually relevant approach to NDD detection. The study provides strong initial evidence of diagnostic accuracy across multiple LMIC settings, with high feasibility and acceptability among caregivers and health workers. How this study might affect research, practice or policy Future studies could enable scaled up implementation of tools such as INDIGO integrated into national child health systems for early NDD detection, enhancing referral and intervention in LMICs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders→French-language works237,207→