Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31787109›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2019

Recruitment and retention of fathers with young children in early childhood health intervention research: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Elizabeth M Keys, Jill M Norris, Emily E Cameron, Katherine S Bright, Lianne M Tomfohr-Madsen, Karen M Benzies

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Elizabeth M KeysFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, PF2278, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1 N4, Canada.
Jill M NorrisFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, PF2278, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1 N4, Canada.
Emily E CameronDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Katherine S BrightFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, PF2278, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1 N4, Canada.
Lianne M Tomfohr-MadsenDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Karen M BenziesFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, PF2278, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1 N4, Canada. benzies@ucalgary.ca.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFathers are under-represented in research and programs addressing early childhood health and development. Recruiting fathers into these interventions can be hampered for multiple reasons, including recruitment and retention strategies that are not tailored for fathers. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the effectiveness of recruitment and retention strategies used to include fathers of children (from conception to age 36 months) in intervention studies. The secondary aim is to investigate study-level factors that may influence recruitment and retention.

methodsWe will conduct searches for scholarly peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and pre-post studies that recruited fathers using the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), and CINAHL. English-language articles will be eligible if they recruited self-identified fathers of children from conception to age 36 months for health-promoting interventions that target healthy parents and children. Two reviewers will independently screen titles/abstracts and full texts for inclusion, as well as grading methodological quality. Recruitment and retention proportions will be calculated for each study. Where possible, we will calculate pooled proportional effects with 95% confidence intervals using random-effects models and conduct a meta-regression to examine the impact of potential modifiers of recruitment and retention. DISCUSSION: Findings from this review will help inform future intervention research with fathers to optimally recruit and retain participants. Identifying key factors should enable health researchers and program managers design and adapt interventions to increase the likelihood of increasing father engagement in early childhood health interventions. Researchers will be able to use this review to inform future research that addresses current evidence gaps for the recruitment and retention of fathers. This review will make recommendations for addressing key target areas to improve recruitment and retention of fathers in early childhood health research, ultimately leading to a body of evidence that captures the full potential of fathers for maximizing the health and wellbeing of their children. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018081332.

Indexed as

Child HealthFather-Child RelationsMeta-Analysis as TopicResearchSystematic Reviews as TopicChild, PreschoolHumansInfantInfant, NewbornAttritionFather-child relationsFathersInfantIntervention studiesResearch subject recruitmentSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31787109
PMCPMC6886200

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.