Cited by 159Child and Adolescent HealthInfant Development and Preterm CareFamily and Disability Support Research

The impact of race on participation in part C early intervention services

Open access
Feinberg, Emily, Silverstein, Michael, Donahue, Sara, Bliss, Robin·2011·Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To quantify racial differences in receipt of early intervention (EI) services among children ages birth to 3 years. METHODS: Multivariable analyses of a nationally representative sample of children eligible for EI services using data from the Early Child Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort was conducted. Birth weight <1000 g, genetic and medical conditions associated with developmental delay, or low scores on a standardized measure of developmental performance defined EI eligibility. Receipt of EI services was ascertained from parent self-report. The effect of race on receipt of EI services was examined in main effect models and models stratified by EI qualifying condition, which was defined as either established medical condition or developmental delay in the absence of an underlying medical diagnosis. RESULTS: At 9 months of age, among the 1000 children eligible for EI services, 9% of children received services; there were no black-white racial differences in receipt of services. At 24 months of age, among the 1000 children eligible for EI services, 12% received services; black children were 5 times less likely to receive services than white children (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09, 0.39). In models stratified by qualifying condition, black children who qualified for services at 24 months based on developmental delay alone were less likely to receive services (aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.02, 0.39); there were no differences by race among children who qualified based on established medical conditions (aOR 0.56; 95% CI 0.18, 1.72). CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparities in EI service receipt, which were not present during infancy, emerged as children became toddlers. These disparities were found most consistently among children who qualified for services based on developmental delay alone.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/dbp.0b013e3182142fbd

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A previous trial of a multi-site family navigation intervention showed increased and earlier diagnoses among young children at risk for autism, predominantly for Hispanic families.

    “One previous trial of a multi-site family navigation intervention showed increased and earlier diagnoses among young children at risk for autism, predominantly for Hispanic families.21”

    From Sustained Effectiveness of a 211 Call Center With Early Childhood Care Coordination (2025) · cites this paper as [21]

    The Methods (Data Source and Data Analyses; page unavailable) describe analyses of a birth cohort of non-Hispanic Black and white children, measuring receipt of early intervention services—not a family-navigation trial measuring autism diagnoses. The Discussion (page unavailable) explicitly calls it a cohort study and says Hispanic children were not included. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feinberg, E., Silverstein, M., Donahue, S., & Bliss, R.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Feinberg, Emily
  • Silverstein, Michael
Venue
Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics
Published
2011-05
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
284-291
ISSN
0196-206X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036972979
Cited by
159
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 4
FWCI
12.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (R40 MC08593)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH074079)
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (K23NR010588)
  • Maternal and Child Health Bureau
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Child and Adolescent Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
Keywords
Part C early intervention, racial disparities, service receipt, developmental delay, black-white disparities, health conditions
MeSH terms
Black or African American, Developmental Disabilities, Humans, Infant, United States, Cohort Studies, Early Intervention, Educational, Black People, White People, Healthcare Disparities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review