Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24138747›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2013

Evaluation of the national roll-out of parenting programmes across England: the parenting early intervention programme (PEIP).

Geoff Lindsay, Steve Strand

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Beyond effectiveness of the Strengthening Families Program (10-14): a scoping RE-AIM-based review.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Parental-Group Interventions for Parents of Children with Mental Health Problems Admitted in a Tertiary Care Center: An Experience from India.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Geoff LindsayCentre for Educational Development, Appraisal and Research (CEDAR), University of Warwick, Kirby Corner Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK. Geoff.lindsay@warwick.ac.uk.
Steve Strand
University of Oxford · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence based parenting programmes can improve parenting skills and the behaviour of children exhibiting, or at risk of developing, antisocial behaviour. In order to develop a public policy for delivering these programmes it is necessary not only to demonstrate their efficacy through rigorous trials but also to determine that they can be rolled out on a large scale. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the UK government funded national implementation of its Parenting Early Intervention Programme, a national roll-out of parenting programmes for parents of children 8-13 years in all 152 local authorities (LAs) across England. Building upon our study of the Pathfinder (2006-08) implemented in 18 LAs. To the best of our knowledge this is the first comparative study of a national roll-out of parenting programmes and the first study of parents of children 8-13 years.

methodsThe UK government funded English LAs to implement one or more of five evidence based programmes (later increased to eight): Triple P, Incredible Years, Strengthening Families Strengthening Communities, Families and Schools Together (FAST), and the Strengthening Families Programme (10-14). Parents completed measures of parenting style (laxness and over-reactivity), and mental well-being, and also child behaviour at three time points: pre- and post-course and again one year later.

results6143 parents from 43 LAs were included in the study of whom 3325 provided post-test data and 1035 parents provided data at one-year follow up. There were significant improvements for each programme, with effect sizes (Cohen's d) for the combined sample of 0.72 parenting laxness, 0.85 parenting over-reactivity, 0.79 parent mental well-being, and 0.45 for child conduct problems. These improvements were largely maintained one year later. All four programmes for which we had sufficient data for comparison were effective. There were generally larger effects on both parent and child measures for Triple P, but not all between programme comparisons were significant. Results for the targeted group of parents of children 8-13 years were very similar.

conclusionsEvidence-based parenting programmes can be rolled out effectively in community settings on a national scale. This study also demonstrates the impact of research on shaping government policy.

Indexed as

ParentingAdolescentAdultChildChild BehaviorEarly Intervention, EducationalEnglandFemaleHealth EducationHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID24138747
PMCPMC4015171
OpenAlexW2086032214

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.