In one paragraphArticle in Journal of community psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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 registryThe 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 literatureWho cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
4 · The recordCorrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
5 · Who and what moneyAuthors and funding
18 authors.
Kristi M MorrisonSocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0009-0001-3763-7852 Nicole EisenbergSocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3786-2627 Vivian H LyonsSocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0481-5939 Stacy A SterlingDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Pleasanton, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6987-8423 Jordan M BraciszewskiCenter for Health Policy and Health Services Research, Henry Ford Health, Lone Tree, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8685-6699 Dalene BeaulieuSocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
John S BrineySocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Sarah DanzoDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0637-7901 Kevin P HaggertySocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6210-6156 Andrew JessenInstitute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Andrea Kline-SimonDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Pleasanton, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6303-7308 Amy M LoreeCenter for Health Policy and Health Services Research, Henry Ford Health, Lone Tree, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1634-7343 Hannah ScheuerSocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7713-0290 Xu WangCenter for Health Policy and Health Services Research, Henry Ford Health, Lone Tree, Colorado, USA.
Margaret R KuklinskiSocial Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3475-4471 Funding
NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory-Coordinating Center (U24)U24AT009676 · NCCIH · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LESLEY H CURTIS, Adrian Hernandez · 2017 to 2026
$21.5MExtending the delivery of Guiding Good Choices to Spanish-speaking parents in primary care: Administrative supplement to the Guiding Good Choices for Health studyUH3AT009838 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI KUKLINSKI, MARGARET, STERLING, STACY ANN · 2019 to 2022
$6.2MNCCIH NIH HHS U24 AT009676NCCIH NIH HHS UH3 AT009838This work was supported within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory by cooperative agreement UH3 AT009838 from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), with co-funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR), and Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP). This work also received logistical and technical support from the NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory Coordinating Center under award number U24 AT009676 from NCCIH, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD), the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), the NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR), and the NIH Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NCCIH, NIAID, NCI, NIA, NHLBI, NINR, NIMHD, NIAMS, OBSSR, or ODPHP, or NIH.
6 · The paper itselfAbstract
Offering evidence-based parenting interventions to caregivers virtually has the potential to increase the reach and public health impact of interventions. As virtual adaptations to evidence-based interventions increase, attention must be paid to implementation fidelity, as high fidelity is associated with better program outcomes. This study examined implementation fidelity of a virtual adaptation of the family-based Guiding Good Choices program delivered to 292 families in primary care in three large healthcare systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Attendance, dosage, adherence, quality of delivery, and participant engagement were examined quantitatively and qualitatively using interventionist and observer surveys, attendance records, and focus groups with interventionists. Interventionists and observers reported high levels of dosage, adherence, quality of delivery, and participant engagement, but attendance was lower than anticipated. Results suggest that delivering parenting programs virtually in primary care with high fidelity is feasible, but retaining participants may remain challenging in this modality, particularly during a global pandemic.
Indexed as
COVID-19ParentingAdultFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMalePandemicsPrimary Health CareSARS-CoV-2Guiding Good Choicesimplementation fidelityinternet adaptationparenting programpreventionvirtual delivery
Identifiers
PMID40444872
PMCPMC12173218
What OpenQuestion holds
Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390