Manuscript Detail

View Revisions

Wagner, M., & Spiker, D. (2001). Experiences and outcomes for children and families: Multisite Parents as Teachers evaluation. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. http://www.sri.com/policy/cehs/publications/humanpub/patfinal.pdf.

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

WWHV014479

Wagner, M. (2001). The multisite evaluation of the Parents as Teachers home visiting program. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
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)
Moderate Randomized controlled trial High Established on race/ethnicity, SES, and mother’s mental health. None None Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed before 2021
Notes:

In 2020, HomVEE updated this review in two ways. First, HomVEE moved the finding "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 moved the finding "child was covered by health insurance" from the Child Health domain to the Family Economic Self-Sufficiency domain  because ACF determined that health insurance coverage belongs in that domain. 

Study characteristics
Study participants The sample presented here includes 667 mothers with children who were assessed at 1 and 2 years of age. Across three sites, families with a child up to 8 months of age were recruited for enrollment in the Parents as Teachers (PAT) program. At the time of enrollment, mothers had an average education level of just over 12 years. Most study participants were African American (58%) or white (29%). The majority of households enrolled had an annual income of less than $15,000 (60%). Twenty-nine percent of children in the sample had two married parents.
Setting Three local PAT programs participated in the evaluation: the first was located in an Eastern Seaboard rural community, the second was located in a mid-size Southern city, and the third was located in a large Western city.
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 , 44% participated and remained in the program through the child’s second birthday (68% at Site 1, 35% at Site 2, and 31% at Site 3).
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.
Funding sources National Institute of Early Childhood Development and Education of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education; the Smith Richardson Foundation; the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; and the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
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
Moderate DPII average months differential: cognitive development
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 children Mean = 2.20 Mean = 2.40 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate DPII average months differential: communication development
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 children Mean = 4.90 Mean = 4.50 Mean difference = 0.40 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate DPII average months differential: physical development
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 children Mean = 2.90 Mean = 3.00 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate DPII average months differential: self-help development
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 children Mean = 6.10 Mean = 6.00 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate DPII average months differential: social development
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 children Mean = 4.90 Mean = 4.90 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate ASBI score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 259 children Mean = 72.30 Mean = 70.80 Mean difference = 1.50 Study reported = 0.21 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
Moderate Child saw doctor for well-child care in past 6 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2 year 265 children % = 91.40 % = 94.80 = -3.40 Study reported = -0.14 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).

Moderate Child was fully immunized
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2 year 265 children % = 26.30 % = 19.00 = 7.30 Study reported = 0.17 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Child went to the emergency room
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2 year 265 children % = 38.50 % = 50.60 = -12.10 Study reported = -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).

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
Moderate Child covered by health insurance
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2 year 265 children % = 79.80 % = 84.80 = -4.60 Study reported = -0.13 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
Moderate AAPI average child maltreatment precursor scale (range = 6 to 24)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean = 19.10 Mean = 19.10 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate AAPI average child maltreatment precursor scale (range = 6 to 24)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 267 mothers Mean = 18.30 Mean = 18.30 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 6.00 Mean = 6.20 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.12 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 6.00 Mean = 5.70 Mean difference = 0.30 Study reported = 0.22 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME appropriate play materials subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 7.90 Mean = 7.40 Mean difference = 0.30 Study reported = 0.26 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME involvement with child subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 5.00 Mean = 4.90 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME involvement with child subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 4.10 Mean = 4.10 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME opportunities for stimulation subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 3.70 Mean = 3.50 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME opportunities for stimulation subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 3.40 Mean = 3.40 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME organization of the environment subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 5.30 Mean = 5.30 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME appropriate play materials subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 6.80 Mean = 6.70 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME organization of the environment subscale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 5.70 Mean = 5.60 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.17 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME parental responsivity subcale
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 9.40 Mean = 9.30 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME subscale related to language- and literacy-promoting behaviors (range = 0 to 8)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 5.50 Mean = 5.30 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME subscale related to language- and literacy-promoting behaviors (range = 0 to 8)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 mothers Mean = 6.50 Mean = 6.10 Mean difference = 0.40 Study reported = 0.31 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME subscale: parental responsivity
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 8.50 Mean = 8.50 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME total scale (range = 0 to 45)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 37.70 Mean = 36.40 Mean difference = 1.30 Study reported = 0.22 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate HOME total scale (range = 0 to 45)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 34.10 Mean = 34.20 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.93
Moderate NCAST, total scale score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 254 mothers Mean = 52.60 Mean = 52.90 Mean difference = -0.30 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant,
p = 0.41
Moderate PSOC parenting efficacy subscale (range = 8 to 32)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean = 28.60 Mean = 28.80 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate PSOC parenting efficacy subscale (range = 8 to 32)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 267 mothers Mean = 28.70 Mean = 28.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate PSOC satisfaction subscale (range = 9 to 36)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 267 mothers Mean = 25.50 Mean = 25.70 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate PSOC satisfaction subscale (range = 9 to 36)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean = 25.90 Mean = 26.80 Mean difference = -0.90 Study reported = -0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate PSOC total scale (range = 17 to 68)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean = 54.40 Mean = 55.60 Mean difference = -1.20 Study reported = -0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate PSOC total scale (range = 17 to 68)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 267 mothers Mean = 54.20 Mean = 54.40 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Language literacy numeracy promotion scale (range = 6 to 24)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 19.00 Mean = 18.50 Mean difference = 0.50 Study reported = 0.12 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Language literacy numeracy promotion scale (range = 6 to 24)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 mothers Mean = 20.00 Mean = 19.70 Mean difference = 0.30 Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent Observation Scale (range 1 to 4; 4 = more observant)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 340 mothers Mean = 3.70 Mean = 3.80 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.21 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent Observation Scale (range 1 to 4; 4 = more observant)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 267 mothers Mean = 3.80 Mean = 3.80 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent reads books with child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 327 mothers Mean = 3.00 Mean = 3.00 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent reads books with child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 261 mothers Mean = 3.20 Mean = 3.20 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent talks to/asks child questions during reading
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 327 mothers Mean = 3.30 Mean = 3.10 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent talks to/asks child questions during reading
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 261 mothers Mean = 3.60 Mean = 3.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent tell stories sings with child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 3.40 Mean = 3.50 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parent tell stories sings with child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 mothers Mean = 3.40 Mean = 3.20 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.19 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge all items (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean % = 78.80 Mean % = 80.00 Mean difference = -0.20 Study reported = -0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge all items (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 268 mothers Mean % = 77.70 Mean % = 75.90 Mean difference = 1.80 Study reported = 0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge child care and safety (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 268 mothers Mean % = 74.30 Mean % = 74.60 Mean difference = -0.30 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge child care and safety (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean % = 84.00 Mean % = 85.50 Mean difference = -1.50 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge discipline (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 268 mothers Mean % = 75.40 Mean % = 75.80 Mean difference = -0.40 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge discipline (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean % = 84.80 Mean % = 85.20 Mean difference = -0.40 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge emotional development (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean % = 75.50 Mean % = 77.90 Mean difference = -2.40 Study reported = -0.12 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge emotional development (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 268 mothers Mean % = 79.80 Mean % = 75.10 Mean difference = 4.70 Study reported = 0.24 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge general child development (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 268 mothers Mean % = 74.00 Mean % = 71.90 Mean difference = 2.10 Study reported = 0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge general child development (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean % = 82.40 Mean % = 80.30 Mean difference = 2.10 Study reported = 0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge language/cognitive development (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 268 mothers Mean % = 79.90 Mean % = 78.70 Mean difference = 1.20 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Parental knowledge language/cognitive development (percentage answered correctly)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 344 mothers Mean % = 70.70 Mean % = 73.90 Mean difference = -3.20 Study reported = -0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate While doing everyday things parent counts things or uses numbers with child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 mothers Mean = 3.40 Mean = 3.40 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate While doing everyday things parent counts things or uses numbers with child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 3.10 Mean = 3.20 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate While doing everyday things parent reads aloud to child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 mothers Mean = 3.10 Mean = 2.90 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.20 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate While doing everyday things parent reads aloud to child
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 2.80 Mean = 2.60 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate While doing everyday things parent talks to/asks child questions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2-year assessment 266 mothers Mean = 3.30 Mean = 3.40 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate While doing everyday things parent talks to/asks child questions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 1-year assessment 343 mothers Mean = 3.30 Mean = 3.20 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.09 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
Moderate Child treated for injury in the past year
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Three-site sample 2 year 265 children % = 5.50 % = 11.00 = -5.50 Study reported = -0.20 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).

Outcome measure summary

Child development and school readiness
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure
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 the difference in months between a child’s chronological age and the age that corresponds to the skill level assessed.

Child assessment

Child assessment

ASBI: Total score

The ASBI assesses the social development and prosocial/antisocial behaviors of young children. Parent/caregiver report

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 had seen a doctor for well-child care during the past 6 months Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Child was fully immunized

Percentage of children who were fully immunized for their age Review of immunization records for families who could produce them

Not applicable

Child went to the emergency room

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

Child covered by health insurance

Percentage of children who were covered by health insurance

Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

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

KIDI:

  • All items
  • General child development
  • Language/cognitive development
  • Emotional development
  • Discipline
  • Child care and safety
The KIDI measures the parent’s knowledge of childrearing practices and developmental processes. In addition to the total score, the researchers examined subscales about general child development, language/cognitive development, emotional development, and discipline. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

NCAST: Total score

The NCAST assesses the quality of teaching interaction between caregivers and young children. Mothers were assessed while introducing a new toy to their child. Areas of assessment included cue-giving and responsiveness to cues of both the parents and children. Observation

Not reported by author

PSOC: Total score, Parenting efficacy, Satisfaction

The PSOC measures parent attitudes and self-efficacy. The researchers analyzed the total score and scores on the two subscales: parent satisfaction and parent efficacy. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

AAPI: Average CMPS score

The CMPS from the AAPI assesses attitudes toward disciplining children that have been shown to, correlate with later abusive behaviors toward them. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

HOME:

  • Language- and literacy-promoting behaviors
  • Total score
  • Parental responsivity
  • Acceptance of child’s behavior
  • Organization of the environment
  • Appropriate play materials
  • Involvement
  • Opportunities for stimulation
The HOME assesses parenting practices and aspects of the home environment. The researchers examined the total score, as well as subscales related to parental responsivity, acceptance of child's behavior, provision of appropriate play materials,, organization of the child’s environment, parental involvement with children, and the opportunities provided for daily stimulation. Parent/caregiver interview and observational assessment

Not reported by author

Language, literacy, numeracy promotion scale

  • While doing everyday things, parent talks to/asks child questions
  • While doing everyday things, parent reads aloud to child
  • While doing everyday things, parent counts things or uses numbers with child
  • Parent tells stories, sings with child
  • Parent reads books with child
  • Parent talks to/asks child questions during reading
A 6-item measure of direct parent-child verbal interactions that encourage children’s language development, literacy, and numeracy. Each question was answered on a 4-point scale, with 4 being the most positive response. An overall scale was formed by summing the values on these six items. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Parent Observation Scale

A scale of parent observations skills ranging from 1 to 4, with 4 being the most observant Parent/caregiver report

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