Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32580720›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2020

Brief evidence-based interventions for universal child health services: a restricted evidence assessment of the literature.

James J Newham, Karen McLean, Samuel Ginja, Lisa Hurt, Carly Molloy, Raghu Lingam, Sharon Goldfeld

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Brief Interventions for Families Seeking Support from Family Services: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

James J NewhamFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3006-2125
Karen McLeanMurdoch Children's Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Samuel GinjaSchool of Psychology, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.
Lisa HurtDivision of Population Medicine, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.
Carly MolloyMurdoch Children's Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Raghu LingamSchool of Women's & Children's Health, University of New South Wales, Randwick, Australia. r.lingam@unsw.edu.au.
Sharon GoldfeldMurdoch Children's Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUCardiff University · GBNorthumbria University · GBUniversity of Ulster · GBUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUniversal child health services (UCHS) provide an important pragmatic platform for the delivery of universal and targeted interventions to support families and optimize child health outcomes. We aimed to identify brief, evidence-based interventions for common health and developmental problems that could be potentially implemented in UCHS.

methodsA restricted evidence assessment (REA) of electronic databases and grey literature was undertaken covering January 2006 to August 2019. Studies were eligible if (i) outcomes related to one or more of four areas: child social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB), infant sleep, home learning environment or parent mental health, (ii) a comparison group was used, (iii) universal or targeted intervention were delivered in non-tertiary settings, (iv) interventions did not last more than 4 sessions, and (v) children were aged between 2 weeks postpartum and 5 years at baseline.

resultsSeventeen studies met the eligibility criteria. Of these, three interventions could possibly be implemented at scale within UCHS platforms: (1) a universal child behavioural intervention which did not affect its primary outcome of infant sleep but improved parental mental health, (2) a universal screening programme which improved maternal mental health, and (3) a targeted child behavioural intervention which improved parent-reported infant sleep problems and parental mental health. Key lessons learnt include: (1) Interventions should impart the maximal amount of information within an initial session with future sessions reinforcing key messages, (2) Interventions should see the family as a holistic unit by considering the needs of parents with an emphasis on identification, triage and referral, and (3) Brief interventions may be more acceptable for stigmatized topics, but still entail considerable barriers that deter the most vulnerable.

conclusionsDelivery and evaluation of brief evidence-based interventions from a UCHS could lead to improved maternal and child health outcomes through a more responsive and equitable service. We recommend three interventions that meet our criteria of "best bet" interventions.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildChild Health ServicesChild, PreschoolEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleProhibitinsUniversal Health InsuranceProhibitinsChild public healthEmotional and social wellbeingHome learning improvementInfantMental healthRapid evidence assessmentSleep

Identifiers

PMID32580720
PMCPMC7315474
OpenAlexW3037188641

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.