Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26809257›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2016

Cluster randomised-control trial for an Australian child protection education program: Study protocol for the Learn to be safe with Emmy and friends™.

Codi White, Dianne C Shanley, Melanie J Zimmer-Gembeck, Katrina Lines, Kerryann Walsh, Russell Hawkins

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

6 authors.

Codi WhiteSchool of Applied Psychology and Menzies Health Institute of Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia. codi.white@griffithuni.edu.au.
Dianne C ShanleySchool of Applied Psychology and Menzies Health Institute of Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia. d.shanley@griffith.edu.au.
Melanie J Zimmer-GembeckSchool of Applied Psychology and Menzies Health Institute of Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia. m.zimmer-gembeck@griffith.edu.au.
Katrina LinesAct for Kids, Brisbane, Australia. katrinal@actforkids.com.au.
Kerryann WalshFaculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. k.walsh@qut.edu.au.
Russell HawkinsCollege of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia. russell.hawkins@jcu.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChild maltreatment has severe short-and long-term consequences for children's health, development, and wellbeing. Despite the provision of child protection education programs in many countries, few have been rigorously evaluated to determine their effectiveness. We describe the design of a multi-site gold standard evaluation of an Australian school-based child protection education program. The intervention has been developed by a not-for-profit agency and comprises 5 1-h sessions delivered to first grade students (aged 5-6 years) in their regular classrooms. It incorporates common attributes of effective programs identified in the literature, and aligns with the Australian education curriculum. METHODS/

designA three-site cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of Learn to be safe with Emmy and friends™ will be conducted with children in approximately 72 first grade classrooms in 24 Queensland primary (elementary) schools from three state regions, over a period of 2 years. Entire schools will be randomised, using a computer generated list of random numbers, to intervention and wait-list control conditions, to prevent contamination effects across students and classes. Data will be collected at baseline (pre-assessment), immediately after the intervention (post-assessment), and at 6-, 12-, and 18-months (follow-up assessments). Outcome assessors will be blinded to group membership. Primary outcomes assessed are children's knowledge of program concepts; intentions to use program knowledge, skills, and help-seeking strategies; actual use of program material in a simulated situation; and anxiety arising from program participation. Secondary outcomes include a parent discussion monitor, parent observations of their children's use of program materials, satisfaction with the program, and parental stress. A process evaluation will be conducted concurrently to assess program performance. DISCUSSION: This RCT addresses shortcomings in previous studies and methodologically extends research in this area by randomising at school-level to prevent cross-learning between conditions; providing longer-term outcome assessment than any previous study; examining the degree to which parents/guardians discuss intervention content with children at home; assessing potential moderating/mediating effects of family and child demographic variables; testing an in-vivo measure to assess children's ability to discriminate safe/unsafe situations and disclose to trusted adults; and testing enhancements to existing measures to establish greater internal consistency.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ACTRN12615000917538). Registered (02/09/2015).

Indexed as

AustraliaChildChild AbuseCluster AnalysisComprehensionFemaleHealth PromotionHumansParentsProgram EvaluationResearch DesignSchool Health ServicesSchoolsStudents

Identifiers

PMID26809257
PMCPMC4727321

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.