Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34823552›Full record

Trial reportTrials2021

The Reflective Fostering Programme-improving the wellbeing of children in care through a group intervention for foster carers: a randomised controlled trial.

Nick Midgley, Karen Irvine, Beth Rider, Sarah Byford, Antonella Cirasola, Poushali Ganguli, Thando Katangwe-Chigamba, Jamie Murdoch, Martin Pond, Benita Pursch and 9 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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

19 authors.

Nick MidgleyResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, zUniversity College London, London, UK. nick.midgley@annafreud.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6263-5058
Karen IrvineCentre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Beth RiderCentre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Sarah ByfordKings College London, London, UK.
Antonella CirasolaAnna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, UK.
Poushali GanguliKings College London, London, UK.
Thando Katangwe-ChigambaNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Jamie MurdochNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Martin PondNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Benita PurschAnna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, UK.
Sheila RedfernAnna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, UK.
Zena Louise RichardsResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, zUniversity College London, London, UK.
Lee ShepstoneNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Erika SimsNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Caroline SmithKent County Council, Maidstone, UK.
Eva SprecherAnna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, UK.
Ann Marie SwartNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Solange WyattCentre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
David WellstedCentre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.

Funding

Public Health Research Programme 127422 Midgley
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe needs of children in care are a government priority, yet the evidence base for effective interventions to support the emotional wellbeing of children in care is lacking. Research suggests that supporting the carer-child relationship, by promoting the carer's reflective parenting, may be an effective approach to improving the wellbeing of these children.

methodsThe study comprises a definitive, superiority, two-armed, parallel, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial, with embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation, and an internal pilot, to evaluate the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of the Reflective Fostering Programme. Randomisation is at the individual level using a 1:1 allocation ratio. The study is being conducted in local authority sites across England, and is targeted at foster carers (including kinship carers) looking after children aged 4 to 13. Consenting participants are randomly allocated to the Reflective Fostering Programme (intervention arm) in addition to usual support or usual support alone (control arm). The primary outcome is behavioural and emotional wellbeing of the child 12 months post-baseline, and secondary outcomes include the following: foster carer's level of stress, quality of life, reflective capacity, compassion fatigue and burnout, placement stability, the quality of the child-carer relationship, child's capacity for emotional regulation, and achievement of personalised goals set by the carer. DISCUSSION: A feasibility study has indicated effectiveness of the Programme in improving the child-carer relationship and emotional and behavioural wellbeing of children in care. This study will test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementing the Reflective Fostering Programme as an additional aid to the support already available to local authority foster carers.

trial registrationISRCTN 70832140 .

Indexed as

CaregiversQuality of LifeCost-Benefit AnalysisFeasibility StudiesFoster Home CareHumansParentingChildren in careFoster careParentingReflective Fostering ProgrammeReflective parenting

Identifiers

PMID34823552
PMCPMC8613455

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.