Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33076982›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2020

Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examining the effectiveness of early parenting interventions in preventing internalising problems in children and adolescents.

Ilaria Costantini, Elise Paul, Deborah M Caldwell, José A López-López, Rebecca M Pearson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ilaria CostantiniPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol, BS8 2BP, UK. ilaria.costantini@bristol.ac.uk.
Elise PaulPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol, BS8 2BP, UK.
Deborah M CaldwellPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol, BS8 2BP, UK.
José A López-LópezDepartment of Basic Psychology & Methodology, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Rebecca M PearsonPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol, BS8 2BP, UK.
University of Bristol · GBUniversidad de Murcia · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternalising problems, such as depression and anxiety, are common and represent an important economical and societal burden. The effectiveness of parenting interventions in reducing the risk of internalising problems in children and adolescents has not yet been summarised. The aims of this review are to assess the effectiveness of parenting interventions in the primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of internalising problems in children and adolescents and to determine which intervention components and which intervention aspects are most effective for reducing the risk of internalising problems in children and adolescents.

methodsElectronic searches in OVID SP versions of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; EBSCO version of ERIC and ClinicalTrials.gov have been performed to identify randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised controlled trials of parenting interventions. At least two independent researchers will assess studies for inclusion and extract data from each paper. The risk of bias assessment will be conducted independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Statistical heterogeneity is anticipated given potential variation in participant characteristics, intervention type and mode of delivery, and outcome measures. Random effects models, assuming a common between-study variability, will be used to account for statistical heterogeneity. Results will be analysed using a network meta-analysis (NMA). If appropriate, we will also conduct a component-level NMA, where the 'active ingredients' of interventions are modelled using a network meta-regression approach. DISCUSSION: Preventing and reducing internalising problems could have major beneficial effects at the economic and societal level. Informing policy makers on the effectiveness of parenting interventions and on which intervention's component is driving the effect is important for the development of treatment strategies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) number CRD42020172251.

Indexed as

Anxiety DisordersParentingAdolescentChildHumansNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicReview Literature as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicInternalising problemsNetwork meta-analysisParenting interventionsPreventionRandomised controlled trialsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33076982
PMCPMC7574314
OpenAlexW3092689677

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.