Manuscript Detail

View Revisions

Wagner, M., Clayton, S., Gerlach-Downie, S., & McElroy, M. (1999). An evaluation of the northern California Parents as Teachers demonstration. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.

Model(s) Reviewed: Parents as Teachers (PAT)®
Additional sources:

WWHV017041

Wagner, M. & Clayton, S. (1999). The Parents as Teachers program: Results from two demonstrations. The Future of Children, 9(1), 91-115.
Manuscript screening details
Screening decision Screening conclusion HomVEE procedures and standards version
Passes screens Eligible for review Version 1
Study design details
Rating Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Compromised randomization Confounding factors Valid, reliable measure(s)
High Randomized controlled trial Low Not applicable None None Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed before 2021
Notes:

In 2020, HomVEE updated this review in two ways. First, HomVEE moved to two findings about "child treated for injury in the past year" from the Child Health domain to the Reductions in Child Maltreatment domain because the review initially misclassified it. HomVEE places findings related to medical care for injury and ingestions in the Reductions in Child Maltreatment domain. Second, HomVEE removed eight findings related to family structure and mother's partnership status from the Family Economic Self-Sufficiency domain because ACF determined that mother's partnership status is ineligible for review by HomVEE. 

Study characteristics
Study participants The sample presented here includes 375 mothers with children who were assessed at 2 years of age and 363 mothers with children who were assessed at 3 years of age. (This report also includes a sample of mothers followed up when the child was 1 year of age. These analyses received a low rating, however. See Study Ratings for details.) Over the course of one year, families with a child up to 6 months of age were recruited for enrollment in the Parents as Teachers (PAT) program. In the 2-year-old sample, most mothers had an education level of high school or less (77%); more than three-quarters of study participants were Latina mothers (80%); the majority of participating households received Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program (60%), while a minority received Aid to Families with Dependent Children (18%); and 59% of mothers were married. The 3-year-old sample had similar characteristics.
Setting A single site in the Salinas Valley in Northern California
Intervention services Families enrolled in PAT received monthly home visits and other program services for as long as they remained in the program, up to the child’s third birthday. Among those families enrolled in PAT , 57% participated and remained in the program for all three years.
Comparison conditions The comparison families received only the services that were normally available in the community and that they sought of their own accord. In addition, they received age-appropriate toys at regular quarterly intervals, which were used as a means of tracking their locations.
Subgroups examined This field lists subgroups examined in the manuscript (even if they were not replicated in other samples and not reported on the summary page for this model’s report).
Subgroups are not listed for manuscripts reviewed before 2021.
Staff characteristics and training Parent educators were trained by the PAT national staff at the certified training center during a weeklong session. All parent educators had previous experience working with children and families, but their educational backgrounds varied widely.
Funding sources The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Author affiliation None of the study authors are developers of this model.
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed status is not listed for manuscripts reviewed before 2021.

Findings details

Child development and school readiness
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High BSID Mental Development Index (in normal range)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 184 children % = 67.60 % = 69.60 = -2.00 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High BSID Mental Development Index (mean)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 184 children Mean = 91.00 Mean = 92.20 Mean difference = -1.20 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High BSID Physical Development Index (in normal range)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 184 children % = 85.70 % = 79.80 = 5.90 Study reported = 0.16 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High BSID Physical Development Index (mean)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 184 children Mean = 99.80 Mean = 98.40 Mean difference = 1.40 Study reported = 0.12 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Cognitive Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children % = 44.80 % = 41.20 = 3.60 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Cognitive Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children % = 68.60 % = 67.70 = 0.90 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Cognitive Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children Mean = -0.50 Mean = -1.10 Mean difference = 0.60 Study reported = 0.10 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Cognitive Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children Mean = 1.80 Mean = 1.80 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Communication Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children % = 78.60 % = 77.10 = 1.50 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Communication Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children % = 82.70 % = 74.80 = 7.90 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High DPII Communication Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children Mean = 5.40 Mean = 5.30 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Communication Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children Mean = 4.30 Mean = 4.40 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Physical Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children % = 78.10 % = 79.10 = -1.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Physical Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children % = 86.40 % = 85.20 = 1.20 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Physical Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children Mean = 3.90 Mean = 3.70 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Physical Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children Mean = 4.60 Mean = 4.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Self-Help Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children % = 96.40 % = 95.50 = 0.90 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Self-Help Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children % = 92.90 % = 90.80 = 2.10 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Self-Help Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children Mean = 7.30 Mean = 7.40 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Self-Help Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children Mean = 13.00 Mean = 10.80 Mean difference = 2.20 Study reported = 0.25 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
High DPII Social Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children % = 91.60 % = 93.20 = -1.60 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High DPII Social Development Scale (at or above chronological age)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children % = 83.30 % = 73.90 = 9.40 Study reported = 0.23 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High DPII Social Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 375 children Mean = 4.70 Mean = 5.80 Mean difference = -1.10 Study reported = -0.24 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
High DPII Social Development Scale (mean months differential)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 363 children Mean = 7.40 Mean = 5.90 Mean difference = 1.50 Study reported = 0.17 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PPVT ator above chronological age
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 320 children % = 50.00 % = 49.20 = 0.80 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PPVT mean months differential
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 320 children Mean = 0.30 Mean = -0.20 Mean difference = 0.50 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Child health
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High Child saw doctor for well-child care in past 6 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 352 children % = 56.90 % = 57.60 = -0.70 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Child saw doctor for well-child care in past 6 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 365 children % = 84.70 % = 86.90 = -2.20 Study reported = -0.24 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Child treated for illness in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 352 children % = 51.00 % = 50.20 = 0.80 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Child treated for illness in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 365 children % = 39.30 % = 33.30 = 6.00 Study reported = 0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Child went to the emergency room in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 352 children % = 20.30 % = 24.50 = -4.20 Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Child went to the emergency room in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 365 children % = 29.70 % = 33.60 = -3.90 Study reported = -0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Family economic self-sufficiency
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High Any postsecondary education
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 29.30 % = 38.80 = -9.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.26 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Any postsecondary education
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers % = 27.00 % = 33.10 = -6.10 HomeVEE calculated = -0.18 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Attending school in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 25.80 % = 23.50 = 3.30 HomeVEE calculated = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Attending school in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers % = 27.70 % = 30.70 = -3.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Average highest grade level
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers Mean = 10.80 Mean = 11.60 Mean difference = -0.80 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Average highest grade level
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers Mean = 10.50 Mean = 11.20 Mean difference = -0.70 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High High school graduate
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 24.50 % = 20.40 = 4.10 HomeVEE calculated = 0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High High school graduate
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers % = 23.20 % = 22.70 = 0.50 HomeVEE calculated = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Household income $10000 - $29999
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers % = 57.90 % = 44.90 = 13.00 HomeVEE calculated = 0.32 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Household income $10000 - $29999
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 55.30 = = 7.90 HomeVEE calculated = 0.19 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Household income $30000 or more
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 25.30 % = 36.80 = -11.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.33 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
High Household income $30000 or more
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers % = 22.60 % = 33.60 = -11.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.33 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Household income less than $10000
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers % = 19.50 % = 21.50 = -2.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Household income less than $10000
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 19.30 % = 15.80 = 3.50 HomeVEE calculated = 0.15 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Household receiving AFDC
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 15.40 % = 17.90 = -2.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.11 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Household receiving AFDC
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers % = 16.10 % = 22.20 = -6.10 HomeVEE calculated = -0.24 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Household receiving Medi-Cal
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers % = 39.90 % = 45.10 = -5.20 HomeVEE calculated = -0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Household receiving Medi-Cal
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 37.00 % = 36.40 = 0.60 HomeVEE calculated = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Less than high school
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 46.20 % = 40.80 = 5.40 HomeVEE calculated = 0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Less than high school
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers % = 49.80 % = 44.20 = 5.60 HomeVEE calculated = 0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Mother working/in job training
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers % = 48.80 % = 36.20 = 12.60 HomeVEE calculated = 0.31 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Mother working/in job training
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers % = 55.40 % = 46.00 = 9.40 HomeVEE calculated = 0.23 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

Maternal health
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High Mother had additional births
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 343 mothers = % = 27.50 = -6.70 HomeVEE calculated = -0.22 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Mother had additional births
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 371 mothers % = 14.80 % = 16.30 = -1.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Positive parenting practices
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High Discipline (from HOME items)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 5.70 Mean = 5.90 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.27 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
High HOME acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 6.40 Mean = 6.70 Mean difference = -0.30 Study reported = -0.28 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
High HOME involvement with child subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 4.00 Mean = 4.00 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME involvement with child subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 4.60 Mean = 4.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME opportunities for stimulation subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 3.40 Mean = 3.50 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 6.40 Mean = 6.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.32 Statistically significant,
p < 0.001
High HOME appropriate play materials subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 6.70 Mean = 6.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME appropriate play materials subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 6.60 Mean = 6.50 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME language- and literacy-promoting behaviors
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 5.80 Mean = 5.80 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME opportunities for stimulation subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 3.50 Mean = 3.60 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME organization of the environment subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 5.70 Mean = 5.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME organization of the environment subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 5.70 Mean = 5.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME parental responsivity subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 10.00 Mean = 10.00 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME parental responsivity subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 9.90 Mean = 9.80 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME total scale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 36.20 Mean = 36.40 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High HOME total scale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 350 mothers Mean = 36.60 Mean = 37.20 Mean difference = -0.60 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High KIDI
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 350 mothers Mean = 0.66 Mean = 0.69 Mean difference = -0.02 Study reported = -0.18 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High KIDI
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 367 mothers Mean = 0.65 Mean = 0.65 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PSOC parenting efficacy subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 341 mothers Mean = 27.10 Mean = 26.60 Mean difference = 0.50 Study reported = 0.15 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PSOC parenting efficacy subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 357 mothers Mean = 27.20 Mean = 27.00 Mean difference = 0.02 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PSOC parenting satisfaction subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 341 mothers Mean = 25.40 Mean = 26.40 Mean difference = -1.00 Study reported = -0.18 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PSOC parenting satisfaction subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 357 mothers Mean = 24.60 Mean = 25.20 Mean difference = -0.06 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PSOC total score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 341 mothers Mean = 52.40 Mean = 52.90 Mean difference = -0.50 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PSOC total score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 357 mothers Mean = 51.80 Mean = 52.20 Mean difference = -0.40 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Home mother-child interaction
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 335 mothers Mean = 5.20 Mean = 5.20 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Reductions in child maltreatment
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High Child treated for injury in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 3 year 352 children % = 8.10 % = 11.90 = -3.80 Study reported = -0.12 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote61

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

High Child treated for injury in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Northern California sample 2 year 365 children % = 12.00 % = 14.90 = -2.90 Study reported = -0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Outcome measure summary

Child development and school readiness
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

BSID:

  • Physical Development Index
  • Mental Development Index
The BSID tests the mental, motor, and behavioral development and abilities of young children. The researchers examined both the mental development and physical development scales. The scores were presented as (1) average scores, and (2) the proportion of the sample that were within the normal range (scores of 86 or above). Child assessment

Not reported by author

DPII:

  • Physical Development Scale
  • Cognitive Development Scale
  • Communication Development Scale
  • Self-Help Development Scale
  • Social Development Scale
The subscales of the DPII assess the physical, communication, self-help, social, and cognitive development of young children. The scores were presented as (1) the difference in months between a child’s chronological age and the age that corresponds to the skill level assessed, and (2) the proportion of the sample assessed as at or above their chronological age in the area assessed. Child assessment

Not reported by author

PPVT

The PPVT assesses receptive language in young children. Scores were presented as (1) the number of months difference between the chronological age of the child and his/her receptive language developmental age, and (2) the proportion of the sample assessed as at or above their chronological age. Child assessment

Not reported by author

Child health
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

Child saw doctor for well-child care in past 6 months

Percentage of children who saw a doctor for well-child care within the past 6 months Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Child treated for illness in the past year

Percentage of children who were treated for an illness during the past year Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Child went to the emergency room in the past year

Percentage of children who went to the emergency room during the past year Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Family economic self-sufficiency
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

Any postsecondary education

Percentage of mothers who had some postsecondary education Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Attending school in the past year

Percentage of mothers who attended school in the past year Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Average highest grade level

An average of the highest level of school that the mother had completed Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

High school graduate

Percentage of mothers who had completed high school Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Household income $10,000–$29,999

Percentage of households with incomes between $10,000 and $29,000 Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Household income $30,000 or more

Percentage of households with incomes of $30,000 or greater Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Household income less than $10,000

Percentage of households with incomes less than $10,000 Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Household receiving AFDC

Percentage of households that received AFDC Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Household receiving Medi-Cal

Percentage of households that received Medi-Cal Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Less than high school

Percentage of mothers who had less than a high school education Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Mother working/in job training

Percentage of mothers who were working or in job training Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Maternal health
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

Mother had additional births

Percentage of mothers who experienced additional births after entering Parents as Teachers Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Positive parenting practices
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

KIDI

The KIDI measures the parent’s knowledge of childrearing practices and developmental processes. The researchers measured the percentage of items that were answered correctly on the 57-item assessment. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

PSOC Scale: Total score, Parenting satisfaction subscale, Parenting efficacy subscale

The PSOC measures parent attitudes and self-efficacy. The researchers examined the total score and two subscale scores regarding parental, efficacy and satisfaction. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

HOME:

  • Total score
  • Parental responsivity subscale
  • Acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
  • Organization of the environment subscale
  • Appropriate play materials subscale
  • Involvement with child subscale
  • Opportunities for stimulation subscale
  • Parental responsivity subscale
  • Language- and literacy-promoting behaviors
  • Mother-child interaction
  • Discipline
The HOME assesses parenting practices and aspects of the home environment. The researchers examined the total score, as well as the following subscales: acceptance of child’s behavior, opportunity for stimulation, organization of the environment, parental involvement, parental responsivity, appropriate play materials, language promoting behaviors, mother-child interaction, and discipline. Parent/caregiver interview and observational assessment

Not reported by author

Reductions in child maltreatment
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

Child treated for injury in the past year

Percentage of children who were treated for an injury during the past year

Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable