Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)® Meets HHS Criteria

Model effectiveness research report last updated: 2024

Effects shown in research

Child health

Findings rated high

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
5-minute Apgar
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children Adjusted mean = 8.60 Adjusted mean = 8.70 Mean difference = -0.10 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Birth weight, grams
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full (Memphis) 1082 children Adjusted mean = 3032.20 Adjusted mean = 3050.40 Mean difference = -18.20 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Breastfeeding attempted, percentage
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
2 years postnatal Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 671 children % (adjusted) = 26.00 Adjusted mean % = 16.00 OR = 1.90 HomVEE calculated = 0.37 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Gestational age, weeks
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children Adjusted mean = 39.00 Adjusted mean = 39.00 Mean difference = 0.00 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Immunizations up to date, percentage
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
2 years postnatal Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 671 children % (adjusted) = 70.00 Adjusted mean % = 68.00 OR = 1.10 HomVEE calculated = 0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Indicated preterm delivery (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children % (adjusted) = 3.00 Adjusted mean % = 3.00 OR = 1.00 HomVEE calculated = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Intrauterine growth restriction (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children % (adjusted) = 9.00 Adjusted mean % = 9.00 OR = 1.00 HomVEE calculated = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Low birth weight (percentage < 2500 g)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children % (adjusted) = 15.00 Adjusted mean % = 14.00 OR = 1.10 HomVEE calculated = 0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Number of well-child visits
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
2 years postnatal Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 671 children Adjusted mean = 4.60 Adjusted mean = 4.80 Mean difference = -0.20 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Preterm (less than 37 weeks, percentage)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children % (adjusted) = 11.00 Adjusted mean % = 13.00 OR = 0.80 HomVEE calculated = -0.12 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Spontaneous preterm delivery, percentage
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth Full, (Memphis) 1082 children % (adjusted) = 8.00 Adjusted mean % = 9.00 OR = 0.80 HomVEE calculated = -0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Submitted by user on
The odds ratio compares the nurse-visited group to the comparison.
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Number of subsequent low birth weight newborns (< 2500 g)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
3-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 646 mothers Mean = 0.12 Mean = 0.15 Mean difference = -0.03 Not available Not statistically significant,
p ≥ 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Number of subsequent neonatal intensive care unit or special care admissions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
3-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 646 mothers Mean = 0.14 Mean = 0.20 Mean difference = -0.06 Not available Not statistically significant,
p ≥ 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Submitted by user on
Authors report the difference in this outcome to be statistically significant, p < 0.10, which is greater than the acceptable alpha for this review (α = 0.05).
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Any Medicaid-paid nonbirth hospitalizations

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

1105 children Adjusted proportion = 0.14 Adjusted proportion = 0.20 Difference = -0.06 Study reported = -0.26

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available. The study reported this finding was statistically significant (p = 0.01) prior to a multiple comparisons adjustment.

At risk of being overweight (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

747 children Adjusted proportion = 0.29 Adjusted proportion = 0.34 Difference = -0.05 Study reported = -0.13

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Duration of breastfeeding

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

918 children Adjusted mean = 4.40 Adjusted mean = 4.60 Difference = -0.20 Not available

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Normal weight (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

747 children Adjusted proportion = 0.59 Adjusted proportion = 0.54 Difference = 0.05 Study reported = 0.13

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Number of Medicaid-paid immunizations

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

895 children Adjusted mean = 6.90 Adjusted mean = 7.50 Difference = -0.60 Not available

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Primary care provider for the child (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

939 children Adjusted proportion = 0.88 Adjusted proportion = 0.88 Difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Underweight (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15-month follow-up

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample

747 children Adjusted proportion = 0.11 Adjusted proportion = 0.12 Difference = -0.01 Study reported = -0.04

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Birth

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE-Strong Start), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

1854 infants Not reported Not reported Difference = 0.01 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.68

Any emergency department visits (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

12 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE-Strong Start), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

1854 infants Not reported Not reported Difference = 0.00 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.90

Any nonbirth hospitalizations (%)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

12 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE-Strong Start), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

1854 infants Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.01 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.52

Average number of well-child office visits

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

12 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE-Strong Start), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

1854 infants Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.16 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.37

Low birth weight (< 2,500 grams; %)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Birth

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE-Strong Start), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

1714 infants Not reported Not reported Difference = 0.00 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.87

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Preterm birth (< 37 weeks; %)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Birth

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE-Strong Start), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

1715 infants Not reported Not reported Difference = 0.02 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.24

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Adverse birth outcome composite

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4966 children Adjusted proportion = 0.27 Infants Adjusted proportion = 0.26 Infants Mean difference = 0.01 Study reported = 0.02

Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Extremely preterm birth

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4932 children Adjusted proportion = 0.01 Infants Adjusted proportion = 0.01 Infants Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00

Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Large for gestational age

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4932 children Adjusted proportion = 0.05 Infants Adjusted proportion = 0.06 Infants Mean difference = -0.01 Study reported = -0.11

Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05

Mean birth weight (in grams)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4932 children Adjusted mean = 3086.10 Infants Adjusted mean = 3093.90 Infants Mean difference = -7.80 HomVEE calculated = -0.01

Not statistically significant, p = 0.67

Submitted by nwu on

Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.

Mean gestational age (in weeks)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4932 children Adjusted mean = 38.20 Infants Adjusted mean = 38.10 Infants Mean difference = 0.10 HomVEE calculated = 0.04

Not statistically significant, p = 0.15

Submitted by nwu on

Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.

Neonatal morbidity

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4932 children Unadjusted proportion = 0.10 Infants Unadjusted proportion = 0.09 Infants Mean difference = 0.01 Study reported = 0.09

Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Overnight NICU stay

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4543 children Adjusted proportion = 0.08 Infants Adjusted proportion = 0.09 Infants Mean difference = -0.01 Study reported = -0.06

Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Very low birth weight

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Child's birth

NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample

4932 children Adjusted proportion = 0.02 Infants Adjusted proportion = 0.03 Infants Mean difference = -0.01 Study reported = -0.17

Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05

Submitted by user on

Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance

Number of Medicaid-paid child emergency department visits (fixed effect random slope analysis)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

895 children Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.50 Not available

Statistically significant, p= 0.02

Number of Medicaid-paid child emergency department visits (restricted maximum likelihood analysis)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

895 children Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.50 Not available

Statistically significant, p= 0.03

Number of Medicaid-paid child emergency department visits (split-sample analysis)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

895 children Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.50 Not available

Statistically significant, p= 0.01

Number of Medicaid-paid well-child visits (fixed effect random slope analysis)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

895 children Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.30 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.43

Number of Medicaid-paid well-child visits (restricted maximum likelihood analysis)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

895 children Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.20 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.45

Number of Medicaid-paid well-child visits (split-sample analysis)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

15 months old

NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample

895 children Not reported Not reported Difference = -0.30 Not available

Not statistically significant, p= 0.10

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Night awake (mother-reported number of episodes last 2 weeks
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 164 children Adjusted mean = 3.25 Adjusted mean = 2.83 Mean difference = 0.42 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Night awake (mother-reported number of episodes last 2 weeks
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 163 children Adjusted mean = 2.69 Adjusted mean = 2.83 Mean difference = -0.14 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Number of emergency room visits (first year of life)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 205 children Adjusted mean = 1.12 Adjusted mean = 1.02 Mean difference = 0.10 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of emergency room visits (first year of life)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 223 children Adjusted mean = 0.74 Adjusted mean = 1.02 Mean difference = -0.28 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Number of emergency room visits (second year of life)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
2-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 185 children Adjusted mean = 1.04 Adjusted mean = 1.09 Mean difference = -0.05 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of emergency room visits (second year of life)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
2-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 196 children Adjusted mean = 0.74 Adjusted mean = 1.09 Mean difference = -0.35 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Resist eating (mother-reported number of episodes last 2 weeks)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 164 children Adjusted mean = 2.01 Adjusted mean = 1.72 Mean difference = 0.29 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Resist eating (mother-reported number of episodes last 2 weeks)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 163 children Adjusted mean = 2.29 Adjusted mean = 1.72 Mean difference = 0.57 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Number of days hospitalized (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 209 children Adjusted mean = 0.43 Adjusted mean = 0.31 Mean difference = 0.12 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of days hospitalized (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 221 children Adjusted mean = 0.49 Adjusted mean = 0.31 Mean difference = 0.18 Not available Statistically significant,
p ≤ 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Number of emergency department visits (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 209 children Adjusted mean = 1.24 Adjusted mean = 1.53 Mean difference = -0.29 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of emergency department visits (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 221 children Adjusted mean = 1.00 Adjusted mean = 1.53 Mean difference = -0.53 Not available Statistically significant,
p ≤ .01
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Number of hospital admissions (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 209 children Adjusted mean = 0.11 Adjusted mean = 0.11 Mean difference = 0.00 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of hospital admissions (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 221 children Adjusted mean = 0.14 Adjusted mean = 0.11 Mean difference = 0.03 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Number of scheduled health supervision visits (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 209 children Adjusted mean = 1.27 Adjusted mean = 1.56 Mean difference = -0.29 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of scheduled health supervision visits (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 221 children Adjusted mean = 1.26 Adjusted mean = 1.56 Mean difference = -0.30 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Number of scheduled health supervision visits with problems (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira) 209 children Adjusted mean = 5.18 Adjusted mean = 6.72 Mean difference = -1.54 Not available Statistical significance not reported
Number of scheduled health supervision visits with problems (25 to 50 months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
50 months Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira) 221 children Adjusted mean = 6.24 Adjusted mean = 6.72 Mean difference = -0.48 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Subsequent NICU/special care admission (rate per subsequent birth)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 641 mothers % (adjusted) = 18.00 Adjusted mean % = 23.00 OR = -0.72 HomVEE calculated = -0.20 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.14
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Subsequent low birth weight newborn (rate per subsequent birth)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 641 mothers % (adjusted) = 11.00 Adjusted mean % = 16.00 OR = -0.69 HomVEE calculated = -0.22 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.16
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Number of infant and childhood deaths among firstborn children (birth–9 years)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
9-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 627 mothers per 1,000 = 4.50 per 1,000 per 1,000 = 20.08 per 1,000 OR = 0.22 Not available Not statistically significant,
p = 0.80
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Number of subsequent low birth weight newborns (0–9 years postpartum)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
9-year follow-up Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 627 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.18 Adjusted mean = 0.27 Mean difference = -0.09 Not available Not statistically significant,
p = 0.07
Submitted by user on
Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculation of incidence ratio.
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Subsequent low birth weight newborns
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
4-year follow-up Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver) 424 mothers = 0.06 = 0.08 OR = 0.75 HomVEE calculated = -0.17 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.45
Subsequent special care admissions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
4-year follow-up Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver) 424 mothers = 0.06 = 0.08 OR = 0.66 HomVEE calculated = -0.26 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.27

Findings rated moderate

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Birth weight (grams)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth NFP-trained nurse visitors and comparison nurse visitors 156 children Mean = 3.00 Mean = 3.00 Mean difference = 164.26 HomVEE calculated = 0.29 Not reported
Gestational age (months)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Birth NFP-trained nurse visitors and comparison nurse visitors 154 children Mean = 38.88 Mean = 38.92 Mean difference = -0.04 HomVEE calculated = -0.02 Not reported
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
20 year child mortality rate - all causes (Nurse home visits during pregnancy and infancy vs. developmental screening comparison)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
20 years Nurse home visits during pregnancy and infancy vs. developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 708 mother/child dyads Unadjusted mean = 0.01 Unadjusted mean = 0.03 Mean difference = -0.02 HomVEE calculated = -0.68 Not statistically significant, p = 0.11
Submitted by user on
Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
20 year child mortality rate - preventable cause (Nurse home visits during pregnancy and infancy vs. developmental screening comparison)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
20 years Nurse home visits during pregnancy and infancy vs. developmental screening comparison (Memphis) 708 mother/child dyads Unadjusted mean = 0.00 Unadjusted mean = 0.02 Mean difference = -0.02 Not available Statistically significant, p = 0.04
Submitted by user on
Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Subsequent low birth weight newborns
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
4-year follow-up Paraprofessional. home visitor and comparison (Denver) 431 mothers = 0.03 = 0.08 OR = 0.34 HomVEE calculated = -0.64 Statistically significant,
p = 0.03
Subsequent special care admissions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
4-year follow-up Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver) 431 mothers = 0.05 = 0.08 OR = 0.54 HomVEE calculated = -0.38 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.13
View Revisions