Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35850876›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Impact of a peer-led, community-based parenting programme delivered at a national scale: an uncontrolled cohort design with benchmarking.

Crispin Day, Joshua Harwood, Nadine Kendall, Jo Nicoll

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Crispin DayCentre for Parent and Child Support, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Michael Rutter Centre, De Crespigny Park, Camberwell, London, SE5 8AZ, UK. crispin.1.day@kcl.ac.uk.
Joshua HarwoodHarwood Child Psychology, London, UK.
Nadine KendallDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Jo NicollCentre for Parent and Child Support, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Michael Rutter Centre, De Crespigny Park, Camberwell, London, SE5 8AZ, UK.
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildhood behavioural problems are the most common mental health disorder worldwide and represent a major public health concern, particularly in socially disadvantaged communities. Treatment barriers mean that up to 70% of children do not receive recommended parenting interventions. Innovative approaches, including evidence-based peer-led models, such as Empowering Parents Empowering Communities' (EPEC) Being a Parent (BAP) programme, have the potential to reduce childhood difficulties and improve parenting if replicable and successfully delivered at scale.

methodThis real-world quasi-experimental study, with embedded RCT benchmarking, examined the population reach, attendance, acceptability and outcomes of 128 BAP groups (n = 930 parents) delivered by 15 newly established sites participating in a UK EPEC scaling programme.

resultsScaling programme (SP) sites successfully reached parents living in areas of greater social deprivation (n = 476, 75.3%), experiencing significant disadvantage (45.0% left school by 16; 39.9% lived in rental accommodation; 36.9% lone parents). The only benchmarked demographic difference was ethnicity, reflecting the greater proportion of White British parents living in scaling site areas (SP 67.9%; RCT 22.4%). Benchmark comparisons showed scaling sites' parent group leaders achieved similar levels of satisfaction. Scaling site parent participants reported substantial levels of improvement in child concerns (ES 0.6), parenting (ES 0.9), parenting goals (ES 1.2) and parent wellbeing (ES 0.6) that were of similar magnitude to RCT benchmarked results. Though large, parents reported lower levels of parenting knowledge and confidence acquisition compared with the RCT benchmark.

conclusionDespite common methodological limitations associated with real-world scaling evaluations, findings suggest that this peer-led, community-based, parenting approach may be capable of successful replication at scale and may have considerable potential to improve child and parenting difficulties, particularly for socially disadvantaged populations.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersParentingBenchmarkingChildHumansParentsPeer GroupBehavioural disordersChild developmentDisseminationImplementation scienceParenting

Identifiers

PMID35850876
PMCPMC9295349
OpenAlexW4285800383

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.