Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42591129›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Household mental distress and child cognitive development in Ghana.

Elizabeth Asiedu, Ami Adjoh-Baliki, Alexander Opoku

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Elizabeth AsieduHoward University, Washington, DC, United States.
Ami Adjoh-BalikiAmerican Institutes for Research, Arlington, VA, United States.
Alexander OpokuLancaster University, Accra, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Household mental wellbeing plays an important role in children's cognitive development, yet evidence from developing countries remains limited. This study examines the relationship between household mental distress and children's cognitive development in Ghana. Methods: We use nationally representative longitudinal data from the Ghana Socioeconomic Panel Survey (2009-2010, 2013-2014, and 2018), comprising 8,755 children aged 5-17 years. Children's cognitive ability is measured using a composite index derived from the Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward, and Raven's Progressive Matrices assessments. Household mental distress is measured using the average Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) score of adults in the household. To address potential endogeneity, we employ a leave-one-out community mental distress instrumental variable and supplement the analysis with alternative instrumental-variable specifications, treatment matching, and placebo tests. Results: Across all estimation approaches, children living in mentally distressed households exhibit significantly lower cognitive performance than children in non-distressed households. Estimated effects range from 0.43 to 0.49 standard deviations and are observed among both pre-teens (5-12 years) and adolescents (13-17 years). Analyses using a continuous measure of household mental distress produce similar findings consistent with a dose-response relationship. Discussion: Household mental distress is strongly associated with children's cognitive development in Ghana. Policies aimed at improving children's developmental outcomes may therefore benefit from greater attention to adult mental health within households.

Indexed as

child cognitive developmentGhanahousehold mental distresshuman capitalinstrumental variablespsychological wellbeing

Identifiers

PMID42591129
PMCPMC13461410

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.