How we choose and assess the research
We start with your child's open developmental windows. Those windows guide the research we select and the topics we cover. We then assess what the research supports before turning it into practical guidance for caregivers.
Which sources we use first
We give priority to research that brings together findings from multiple studies, along with current guidance from public-health agencies and professional organizations. We use other sources when they provide relevant detail or help explain how to put a recommendation into practice.
| Priority | Sources | How we use them |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which bring together results from multiple studies; consensus guidelines; and current guidance from government, international health agencies, and professional organizations. | Our starting point for developmental and safety guidance. We check that the source is current and applies to the topic and people the guidance is for. |
| 2 | Large studies that follow groups of people over time, and major research series. | To address gaps or add detail. We keep the study's limits visible and distinguish a connection between two things from evidence that one causes the other. |
| 3 | Parent resources from established health and research institutions. | To help explain practical actions clearly. Where possible, we trace the advice back to the research or professional guidance behind it. |
| 4 | Other summaries of research. | To help interpret a specific topic. For advice that affects safety, we also require the original research or a higher-priority source. |
We do not base recommendations on marketing, advocacy alone, undated blogs, or social posts without sources.
What we check in each source
We read beyond the title and the organization that published it. We ask:
- Who took part, and does the research apply to this stage of development?
- How was the study done?
- Did other studies find similar results?
- Does the research show a connection, or support a cause-and-effect explanation?
- Is the information current?
- What remains uncertain?
The answers determine how we describe the findings and which actions the evidence supports.
How we describe the evidence
These words describe the evidence for a particular statement or recommendation:
- Strong: Multiple reliable sources or authoritative guidance support the practical point.
- Mixed: Findings differ or do not support one clear conclusion.
- Limited: There is too little direct evidence to make a broad claim.
- Still evolving: Research is developing, and the conclusion may change.
We use these descriptions to explain caregiver guidance. They are not a formal grading system for clinical practice guidelines.
What we check before publishing
Our editorial review checks the sources, our explanation of the findings, and the actions we suggest. We check that families can understand the guidance and that the wording stays within what the evidence supports.
For advice that affects safety or changes as professional guidance develops, we require a manual check against current professional and local guidance.
Some topics call for expertise from more than one field. Our 31 review areas identify the expertise a topic may need. We record external expert review only for the specific guidance that has completed it.
We keep the content version, sources, and review information together. Public version records and updates and corrections provide further detail where records have been published.
How families can use the guidance
Resilient Kids explains developmental science and practical ways to use it at home. Your clinician provides screening, diagnosis, treatment, and advice about your child's individual health needs.
Research supporting a recommendation is separate from research testing the effects of using Resilient Kids. Claims about changes in behavior, development, or health would require studies of the product itself.