footnote70
This study corrects for multiple comparisons within this domain using the Bonferonni correction. The study uses a critical p-value of 0.01.
Screening decision | Screening conclusion |
---|---|
Passes screens | Eligible for review |
Rating | Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Reassignment | Confounding factors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
High | Randomized controlled trial | Low | Established on SES, country of origin, and all outcomes. There was a statistically significant difference between groups on mother’s education, number of children younger than age 5 in the home, and number of adults in the home. The study accounted for these differences. | None | None |
This study corrects for multiple comparisons within this domain using the Bonferonni correction. The study uses a critical p-value of 0.01.
Study participants | Fifty-two mother-child dyads were recruited from state-run preschool sites and community centers in the southeastern region of San Diego between July and September 2005. All mothers were Mexican American, 98% were Spanish speaking, and 92% were immigrants. Most mothers were married, had resided in the United States for an average of 12 years, had limited educational backgrounds, and reported annual incomes of $10,000 - $20,000. Half of the group was randomly selected to receive HIPPY services. One participant from the comparison group was unavailable for post-test assessment and was dropped from the analytic sample. |
---|---|
Setting | The study was conducted in San Diego, CA, which is a large urban area. |
Intervention services | The program group used the Spanish version of the HIPPY curriculum. Although the recommended duration is 30 weeks, and program families received treatment for the full 30 weeks, the outcomes were assessed at 15 weeks. At the 15-week point, program participants had received seven 30- to 60-minute home visits and attended eight 2- to 3-hour group meetings. |
Comparison conditions | Comparison families did not receive any of the HIPPY services, but were given priority to receive services in the following year in return for their participation in the study. Both groups also received a small stipend. |
Staff characteristics and training | Program participants were visited by paraprofessionals with a high school diploma/ GED who were from a similar demographic background. The home visitors were trained by HIPPY staff and were supervised by a coordinator with an advanced degree and experience in social work and/or early childhood education. |
Funding sources | Funder(s) not listed. |
Author affiliation | None of the study authors are developers of this model. |
Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
High | Developing Skills Checklist | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Full sample | 16 weeks | 51 children | Mean = 5.17 | Mean = 5.28 | Mean difference = -0.11 | Study reported = -0.03 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.89 |
|
High | Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Full sample | 16 weeks | 51 children | Mean = 29.36 | Mean = 25.30 | Mean difference = 4.03 | Study reported = 0.34 | Statistically significant, p < 0.01 |
footnote68According to <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> calculations, this result is not statistically significant. |
High | Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Full sample | 16 weeks | 51 children | Adjusted mean = 13.39 | Adjusted mean = 13.59 | Mean difference = -0.20 | Study reported = -0.02 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.88 |
Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
High | Parent-Home Survey | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Full sample | 16 weeks | 51 mothers | Mean = 70.58 | Mean = 61.64 | Mean difference = 8.94 | Study reported = 0.87 | Statistically significant, p = 0.00 |
Outcome measure | Description of measure | Data collection method | Properties of measure |
---|---|---|---|
PPVT-R |
The PPVT-R assesses receptive language in young children. | Child assessment | Not reported by author |
Developing Skills Checklist |
The DSC assesses a wide range of skills in young children, such as language, mathematics, memory, and auditory and motor skills. | Child assessment | Not reported by author |
Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised |
The EOWPVT-R assesses expressive vocabulary skills in young children. | Child assessment | Not reported by author |
Outcome measure | Description of measure | Data collection method | Properties of measure |
---|---|---|---|
Parent-Home Survey |
A researcher-developed instrument that assessed parents’ use of home-based supports for children like oral language-based activities, print-based activities, literacy exposure, and parent book reading. The responses were used to generate an index of parent involvement. | Parent/caregiver report | Cronbach’s α = 0.71 |