Trial reportEvaluation & the health professions2018
Multigroup Propensity Score Approach to Evaluating an Effectiveness Trial of the New Beginnings Program.
Trial report in Evaluation & the health professions, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of having foreign domestic workers on informal caregivers of persons with dementia - findings from a multi-method research in Singapore.BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
- The Development, Evaluation, and Implementation of Parenting-focused Prevention Programs in Collaboration with Family Court.Family court review · 2021Article
- Longitudinal Effects of PostDivorce Interparental Conflict on Children's Mental Health Problems Through Fear of Abandonment: Does Parenting Quality Play a Buffering Role?Child development · 2021Article
- Propensity score matching with R: conventional methods and new features.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
- Metastatic Pattern Discriminates Survival Benefit of Type of Surgery in Patients WithFrontiers in surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We used a multigroup propensity score approach to evaluate a randomized effectiveness trial of the New Beginnings Program (NBP), an intervention targeting divorced or separated families. Two features of effectiveness trials, high nonattendance rates and inclusion of an active control, make program effects harder to detect. To estimate program effects based on actual intervention participation, we created a synthetic inactive control comprised of nonattenders and assessed the impact of attending the NBP or active control relative to no intervention (inactive control). We estimated propensity scores using generalized boosted models and applied inverse probability of treatment weighting for the comparisons. Relative to the inactive control, NBP strengthened parenting quality as well as reduced child exposure to interparental conflict, parent psychological distress, and child internalizing problems. Some effects were moderated by parent gender, parent ethnicity, or child age. On the other hand, the effects of active versus inactive control were minimal for parenting and in the unexpected direction for child internalizing problems. Findings from the propensity score approach complement and enhance the interpretation of findings from the intention-to-treat approach.
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.