Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31902038›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2020

Supporting Strategic Investment in Social Programs: a Cost Analysis of the Family Check-Up.

Margaret R Kuklinski, D Max Crowley, Thomas J Dishion, Melvin N Wilson, William E Pelham, Daniel S Shaw

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Kindergarten conduct problems are associated with monetized outcomes in adolescence and adulthood.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Margaret R KuklinskiUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. mrk63@uw.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3475-4471
D Max CrowleyPennsylvania State University, State College, PA, 16801, USA.
Thomas J DishionArizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85281, USA.
Melvin N WilsonUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA.
William E PelhamArizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85281, USA.
Daniel S ShawUniversity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260, USA.
Arizona State University · USPennsylvania State University · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · USUniversity of Virginia · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Preventing Substance Use in the Context of Poverty: Risk and Protection from Early Childhood to Early AdulthoodR01DA036832 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI SHAW, DANIEL S, WESTLING, ERIKA · 2014 to 2020
$10.2M
Research training in substance use prevention: Closing the research-practice gapT32DA039772 · NIDA · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI Cady Berkel, Nancy A. Gonzales · 2015 to 2026
$4.2M
Identifying Children and Teens at Risk for Early Onset Alcohol Use: An Innovative Application of Machine Learning Algorithms to PreventionF31AA026768 · NIAAA · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI PELHAM III, WILLIAM ELLERBE · 2018 to 2019
$88k
NIAAA NIH HHS AA026768)NIDA NIH HHS DA036832NIDA NIH HHS DA039772
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-quality evidence about the costs of effective interventions for children can provide a foundation for fiscally responsible policy capable of achieving impact. This study estimated the costs to society of the Family Check-up, an evidence-based brief home-visiting intervention for high-risk families implemented in the Early Steps multisite efficacy trial. Intervention arm families in three sites were offered 4 consecutive years of intervention, when target children were ages 2 through 5. Data for estimating total, average, and marginal costs and family burden (means and standard deviations, 2015 USD, discounted at 3% per year) came from a detailed database that prospectively documented resource use at the family level and a supplemental interview with trial leaders. Secondary analyses evaluated differences in costs among higher and lower risk families using repeated measures analysis of variance. Results indicated annual average costs of $1066 per family (SD = $400), with time spent by families valued at an additional $84 (SD = $99) on average. Costs declined significantly from ages 2 through 5. Once training and oversight patterns were established, additional families could be served at half the cost, $501 (SD = $404). On the margin, higher risk families cost more, $583 (SD = $444) compared to $463 (SD = $380) for lower risk families, but prior analyses showed they also benefited more. Sensitivity analyses indicated potential for wage-related cost savings in real-world implementation compared to the university-based trial. This study illustrates the dynamics of Family Check-up resource use over time and across families differing in risk.

Indexed as

Child BehaviorProblem BehaviorChild, PreschoolCosts and Cost AnalysisDatabases, FactualEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHouse CallsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMental HealthQualitative ResearchUnited StatesEconomic evaluationEvidence-basedFamily check-upHome visitingPreventionProblem behavior

Identifiers

PMID31902038
OpenAlexW2998178617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.