2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.10.05.20206946
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pre-school childcare and inequalities in child development

Abstract: Centre-based childcare may benefit pre-school children and alleviate inequalities in early childhood development, but evidence on socio-emotional and physical health outcomes is limited. Data were from the UK Millennium Cohort Study (n=14,376). Inverse-probability weighting was used to estimate confounder-adjusted population-average effects of centre and non-centre-based childcare (compared to parental care only) between ages 26-31 months on (age 3): internalising and externalising symptoms, pro-social behavio… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, informal childcare did not yield the same benefits on either language or CEF growth. Although the evidence is mixed regarding the cognitive benefits of informal care (Green, Pearce, Parkes, Robertson, & Katikireddi, 2020; Hansen & Hawkes, 2009; Laing & Bergelson, 2019; Melhuish et al, 2015), ECEC's strengths in terms of, for example, caregiver‐child interactions, predictable schedules, lower screen use, and caregiver education is likely to be important for nurturing children from disadvantaged contexts (Dowsett, Huston, Imes, & Gennetian, 2008). Note that we did not collect fine‐grained information about the nature of this informal childcare at the first observation point since restrictions did not allow household mixing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interestingly, informal childcare did not yield the same benefits on either language or CEF growth. Although the evidence is mixed regarding the cognitive benefits of informal care (Green, Pearce, Parkes, Robertson, & Katikireddi, 2020; Hansen & Hawkes, 2009; Laing & Bergelson, 2019; Melhuish et al, 2015), ECEC's strengths in terms of, for example, caregiver‐child interactions, predictable schedules, lower screen use, and caregiver education is likely to be important for nurturing children from disadvantaged contexts (Dowsett, Huston, Imes, & Gennetian, 2008). Note that we did not collect fine‐grained information about the nature of this informal childcare at the first observation point since restrictions did not allow household mixing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interestingly, informal childcare did not yield the same benefits on either language or CEF growth. Although the evidence is mixed regarding the cognitive benefits of informal care (6,7,52,53), ECEC's strengths in terms of e.g., caregiver-child interactions, predictable schedules, lower screen use and caregiver education is likely to be important for nurturing children from disadvantaged contexts (54). Note that we did not collect fine-grained information about the nature of this informal childcare at the first observation point since restrictions did not allow household mixing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this reason, public investment in ECE targets ‘school readiness’ to improve children's development, ongoing learning trajectories, and life chances. Yet not every ECE program is successful in delivering positive outcomes for children (Green et al, 2021; Melhuish et al, 2015). Understanding what constitutes a high‐quality ECE program and the specific features and thresholds of quality that deliver improved outcomes for children, remains a policy target and research challenge.…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%