ArticleScandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology2020
One-year follow-up of The Incredible Years Parents and Babies Program: A pilot randomized controlled trial.
Article in Scandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Early parenting interventions to prevent internalising problems in children and adolescents: a global systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ mental health · 2023Pooled it
- Positive Parenting and Early Childhood Cognition: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2023Pooled it
- Parent-child Relationship Outcomes of the Incredible Years Parents and Babies Program: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Scandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology · 2022Article
- What do parents think of using informational videos to support recruitment for parenting trials? A qualitative study.Trials · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe foundation of a healthy life begins in pregnancy and early adversity can have detrimental long-term consequences for affected children.
objectiveThis paper examines the effects of the Incredible Years Parents and Babies program (IYPB) at one-year follow-up when offered as a universal parenting intervention to parents with newborn infants.
methodWe conducted a pragmatic, two-arm, parallel pilot randomized controlled trial; 112 families with newborns were randomized to IYPB intervention (n = 76) or usual care (n = 36). The IYPB program is a group intervention with eight two-hour sessions. Follow-up outcomes collected a year after the intervention ended include parental stress, depression, well-being, reflective function, sense of competence, and child cognitive and socio-emotional development.
resultsThere were no intervention effects on any of the primary or secondary parent-reported outcomes at one-year follow-up when the children were 18 months old. When examining the lowest-functioning mothers in moderator analyses, we found that mothers assigned to the IYPB group reported significantly lower scores for the interest and curiosity subscale of the parent reflective function scale than control mothers (β=-1,07 [-2.09,-0.06]).
conclusionWe found no long-term effects of the IYPB when offered as a universal intervention for a relatively well-functioning group of parents with infants in a setting with a high standard of usual care. The intervention was developed for more vulnerable families in settings with a low level of universal care and the program may be effective for families in those circumstances.
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.