ArticleFamily process2022
Toward tailored care for families with multiple problems: A quasi-experimental study on effective elements of care.
Article in Family process, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enduring Outcomes of Family-focused Youth Care: A Systematic Review of Child, Parent and Family Functioning After Care and at Follow-up.Child & youth care forum · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary treatment with youth-initiated mentoring for youths with mental health needs from multi-problem families: a quasi-experimental study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Toward tailored care for families with multiple problems: A quasi-experimental study on effective elements of care.Family process · 2022Article
- An Integrated Specialised Care Approach for Families with Multiple, Severe, and Enduring Problems: A Qualitative Evaluation.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several effective interventions have been developed for families with multiple problems (FMP), but knowledge is lacking as to which specific practice and program elements of these interventions deliver positive outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess the degree to which practice and program elements (contents of and structure in which care is provided) contribute to the effectiveness of interventions for FMP in general and for subgroups with child and/or parental psychiatric problems, intellectual disabilities, or substance use. We performed a quasi-experimental study on the effectiveness of practice and program elements provided in attested FMP interventions. Using self-report questionnaires, we measured primary (child's internalizing and externalizing problems) and secondary (parental stress and social contacts) outcomes at the beginning, end, and three months thereafter. By means of Latent Profile Analysis, we identified groups of families receiving similar combinations of practice elements ("profiles"), and we calculated propensity scores. Next, we assessed how practice element profiles and program elements affected improvement in outcomes, and whether these effects were moderated by subgroup characteristics. We found three practice element profiles (explorative/supportive, action-oriented, and their combination), which were equally effective. Regarding program elements, effects were enhanced by more frequent telephone contact between visits and more frequent intervision. Effectiveness of practice and program elements varied for specific FMP subgroups. Variations in the content of care for FMP do not affect its effectiveness, but variations in the structure of the care do. This finding can help to further improve effective interventions.
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.