ArticleBMJ open2019
Multicentre, randomised waitlist control trial investigating a parent-assisted social skills group programme for adolescents with brain injuries: protocol for the friends project.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAdolescents with brain injury frequently have difficulties with social competence, which persist into adulthood affecting their participation in daily life. To date, there has been limited research into the efficacy of social competence interventions in this population. Research from the Program for the Education and Enrichment of Relational Skills (PEERS) has demonstrated significant improvements in social competence skills, maintained at 1-year to 5-year follow-up, for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. PEERS has not yet been tested among adolescents with brain injury. This protocol describes a pragmatic, parallel two-group pre-test post-test randomised waitlist control trial across two sites in Australia, which aims to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and efficacy of PEERS in adolescents with brain injury compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Forty adolescents with an acquired brain injury or cerebral palsy will be randomly assigned to either the 14-week PEERS group or waitlist care as usual group. The waitlist group will then receive PEERS following the 26-week retention time point. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 14 weeks (immediately postintervention) and 26 weeks follow-up (retention). The primary outcomes are self-report and parent report on the Social Skills Improvement System Rating Scales immediately post PEERS at 14 weeks. Secondary outcomes include increased frequency of get-togethers with peers with reduced conflict and increased adolescent self-reported knowledge of social skills. Acceptability and feasibility will be examined through qualitative analysis of focus group data collected after the completion of each group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the Medical Research Ethics Committee Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/17/QRCH/87), The University of Queensland (2017000864) and the Cerebral Palsy Alliance Ethics Committee (20170802/HREC:EC00402). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, by conference presentation and newsletters to consumers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617000723381.
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.