ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2026
Supporting families and building relationships: Evaluation of a home and sleep safety equipment scheme for impoverished communities.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Sleep safety and home safety resources allow families to care for babies and young children, preventing injuries and child death, adverse outcomes that are strongly linked to poverty and social deprivation. Parenthood involves unexpected costs and greater levels of unmet need for safety resources occur in low-income families. We evaluate a local authority scheme which enabled professionals in County Durham to apply for necessary safety equipment on behalf of eligible families. Study design: A holistic review of the first year of the operation of the Start For Life Fund (SFLF) scheme. Methods: A mixed method approach was used comprising: 1) a descriptive analysis of the application data submitted by professionals; 2) an online survey to capture the views and experiences of staff who had and had not used the scheme; 3) semi structured interviews with staff applicants and recipient families. Results: 679 families (988 children) were supported during the first operational year, average cost £407 per family (£280/child). Three-quarters of children (72.3 %) were under three; over a third (35.7 %) were pre-birth to 1-year. Staff from seven services and over 20 job roles made applications for families with financial, relationship, housing, domestic violence, and disability-related needs, most from areas with high deprivation scores. 256 staff across 8 service areas submitted survey responses, 39 % of whom had used the scheme which was viewed extremely positively. Interviews with 13 staff and 7 families evidenced how children, families and practitioners benefitted. Recipients reported reduced stress and anxiety about child safety and increased parental confidence. Conclusions: By providing families with the sleep and home safety equipment they can't afford the SFLF gives parents the opportunity to change behaviours and reduce the risk to babies and children from unintentional injury and death. It helps to improve working relationships between practitioners and families, reduces parental experiences of anxiety, and risk to staff of moral injury. Taking steps to reduce unexpected infant death and child unintentional injury is crucial for families in absolute and relative poverty. Other local authorities could emulate this scheme.
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.