ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Assessing the parent-infant relationship: a two-stage, COSMIN-informed systematic review evaluating clinician-rated measures.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A psychometric evaluation of the NICHD Parent-Infant Interaction Scales to inform clinical practice.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Perinatal compassion focused therapy for mothers with mental health difficulties: a study protocol for a multisite and mixed methods feasibility and acceptability study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
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
Background: The parent-infant relationship is important for healthy infant development. Parent-infant assessments can aid clinicians in identifying any difficulties within the parent-infant relationship. Meaningful, valid, and reliable clinician-rated measures assist these assessments and provide diagnostic, prognostic, and treatment indications. Thus, this review aimed to (a) provide a comprehensive overview of existing clinician-rated measures and their clinical utility for the assessment of aspects of the parent-infant relationship and (b) evaluate their methodological qualities and psychometric properties. Methods: A systematic search of five databases was undertaken in two stages. In Stage 1, relevant clinician-rated parent-infant assessment measures, applicable from birth until 2 years postpartum were identified. In Stage 2, relevant studies describing the development and/or validation of those measures were first identified and then reviewed. Eligible studies from Stage 2 were quality assessed in terms of their methodological quality and risk of bias; a quality appraisal of each measure's psychometric properties and an overall grading of the quality of evidence were also undertaken. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments methodology was used. Results: Forty-one measures were eligible for inclusion at Stage 1, but relevant studies reporting on the development and/or validation of the parent-infant assessments were identified for 25 clinician-rated measures. Thirty-one studies reporting on those 25 measures that met inclusion criteria were synthesised at Stage 2. Most measures were rated as "low" or "very low" overall quality according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The most promising evidence was identified for the Conclusions: There was a notable diversity of measures that can be used to assess various aspects of the parent-infant relationship, including attunement, attachment, interaction quality, sensitivity, responsivity, and reciprocity. The quality of methodological and psychometric evidence across the reviewed measures was low, with 76% of measures having only one study supporting the measure's development and/or validation. Thus, further research is needed to review the psychometric properties and suitability as assessment measures.
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.