ReviewJournal of epidemiology and community health2006
Pragmatic randomised controlled trials in parenting research: the issue of intention to treat.
Review in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A comprehensive meta-analysis of Triple P-Positive Parenting Program using hierarchical linear modeling: effectiveness and moderating variables.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2008Pooled it
- Efficacy of adding the Kinesio Taping method to guideline-endorsed conventional physiotherapy in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a randomised controlled trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2013Trial
- Family Violence and the Need for Prevention Research in First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Communities.Pimatisiwin · 2010Article
- Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2008 · on this mapArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveTo evaluate trials of parenting programmes, regarding their use of intention to treat (ITT).
designIndividual trials included in two relevant Cochrane systematic reviews were scrutinised by two independent reviewers. Data on country of origin, target audience, trial type, treatment violations, use of ITT, and the management of missing data were extracted. MAIN
resultsThirty trial reports were reviewed. Three reported the use of an ITT approach to data analysis. Nineteen reported losing subjects to follow up although the implications of this were rarely considered. Insufficient detail in reports meant it was difficult to identify study drop outs, the nature of treatment violations, and those failing to provide outcome assessments. In two trials, study drop outs were considered as additional control groups, violating the basic principle of ITT.
conclusionsIt is recommended that future trial reports adhere to CONSORT guidelines. In particular ITT should be used for the main analyses, with strategies for managing treatment violations and handling missing data being reported a priori. Those conducting trials need to acknowledge the social nature of these programmes can sometimes result in erratic parent attendance and participation, which would only increase the chances of missing data. The use of approaches that can limit the proportion of missing data is therefore recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.