Study Detail

View Revisions

Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Gerlach-Downie, S. (1996). Intervention in support of adolescent parents and their children: A final report on the Teen 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.
Study Screening Details
Screening Decision Screening Conclusion
Study passes screens Study Passes Screens
Study Design Details
Rating Design Attrition Baseline Equivalence Reassignment Confounding Factors
Moderate Randomized controlled trial High Established on race/ethnicity, and SES. Lack of equivalence on baseline contraceptive use and experience with infants. Yes None
Notes:

footnote66

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

Although some effect sizes are included in the study tables, <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> was unable to determine if they pertain to the one-year or two-year results and excluded the study-reported effect sizes from this table.

Study Characteristics
Study Participants Four sites in California recruited 717 teens to participate in the study. Teens were eligible if they (1) were less than 19 years of age, and (2) were pregnant or had babies younger than 6 months. Teens were randomly assigned to four conditions: (1) PAT , (2) case management, (3) PAT plus case management, or (4) control group. The HomVEE report focuses on the comparison between PAT and the control group. At enrollment, over half of the mothers were Latina (56%), 20% were African American, 21% were white, and the remainder were classified as “other” race/ethnicity. The average age was 16.7 years, and approximately 30% had dropped out of high school. Follow-ups were conducted around the time of the child’s 1- and 2-year birthdays.
Setting The study was conducted in four sites: Los Angeles, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Santa Barbara. The sponsoring agencies at the sites included three youth-serving organizations and one partnership between a local YWCA and the county health department.
Home Visiting Services Families enrolled in PAT received monthly home visits and group meetings for as long as they remained in the program, up to the child’s second birthday. During the home visits, parent educators provided lessons using the PAT curriculum. Families received 10 visits on average over the two-year period. The study indicates that the PAT services began to “blend” with the case management services, even though this was designed to be a separate condition in the study. For example, some parent educators addressed family planning and postponing subsequent pregnancies, which was a focus of case management, but not part of the PAT curriculum.
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.
Staff Characteristics and Training Parent educators were trained in weeklong sessions held at authorized training sites.
Funding Sources Office of Child Abuse Prevention in the California Department of Social Services; Center for the Future of Children of the David and Lucile Packard Foundation; and the Stuart Foundation.
Author Affiliation None of the study authors are developers of this model.

Study Effects Details

Outcome domain: Child Health Outcome Effects
Rating Outcome Measure Effect Sample Timing of Follow-up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
Moderate Child had a regular source of medical care
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 192 children % = 90.30 % = 92.90 = -2.60 HomeVEE calculated = -0.21 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Child had a regular source of medical care
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 232 children % = 92.00 % = 94.10 = -2.10 HomeVEE calculated = -0.20 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Child saw a doctor for well-baby care in past 6 months
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 232 children % = 97.40 % = 95.80 = 1.60 HomeVEE calculated = 0.30 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary

footnote61

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

In contrast to the study-reported results, <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (<em>p</em> &le; 0.05). The <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> tests of statistical significance are based on the <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> 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 saw a doctor for well-baby care in past 6 months
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 194 children % = 87.10 % = 92.10 = -5.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.33 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary

footnote61

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

In contrast to the study-reported results, <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (<em>p</em> &le; 0.05). The <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> tests of statistical significance are based on the <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

Outcome domain: Child Development and School Readiness Outcome Effects
Rating Outcome Measure Effect Sample Timing of Follow-up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Moderate DPII average months differential: cognitive development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 196 children Mean = 2.60 Mean = 2.20 Mean difference = 0.40 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: cognitive development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 children Mean = 3.90 Mean = 3.60 Mean difference = 0.30 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: communication development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 children Mean = 2.60 Mean = 2.30 Mean difference = 0.30 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: communication development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 196 children Mean = 3.50 Mean = 3.20 Mean difference = 0.30 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: physical development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 children Mean = 3.60 Mean = 3.80 Mean difference = -0.20 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: physical development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 196 children Mean = 5.60 Mean = 5.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: self-help
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 children Mean = 2.70 Mean = 2.60 Mean difference = 0.10 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: self-help
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 196 children Mean = 9.00 Mean = 9.40 Mean difference = -0.40 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: social development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 children Mean = 6.10 Mean = 6.60 Mean difference = -0.50 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate DPII average months differential: social development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 196 children Mean = 7.80 Mean = 6.80 Mean difference = 1.00 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Outcome domain: Positive Parenting Practices Outcome Effects
Rating Outcome Measure Effect Sample Timing of Follow-up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Moderate HOME appropriate play materials subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 7.60 Mean = 8.00 Mean difference = -0.40 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME appropriate play materials subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 7.60 Mean = 7.20 Mean difference = 0.40 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME involvement with child subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 5.00 Mean = 4.70 Mean difference = 0.30 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME involvement with child subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 4.70 Mean = 4.90 Mean difference = -0.20 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME opportunities for stimulation subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 3.50 Mean = 3.40 Mean difference = 0.10 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME opportunities for stimulation subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 4.00 Mean = 3.70 Mean difference = 0.30 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME organization of the environment subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 5.70 Mean = 5.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME organization of the environment subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 5.60 Mean = 5.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 6.10 Mean = 6.00 Mean difference = 0.10 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 6.30 Mean = 6.30 Mean difference = 0.00 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME parental responsivity subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 9.80 Mean = 9.90 Mean difference = -0.10 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME parental responsivity subscale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 9.90 Mean = 9.40 Mean difference = 0.50 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME total scale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers Mean = 38.00 Mean = 38.50 Mean difference = -0.50 Not available Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Moderate HOME total scale
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers Mean = 37.60 Mean = 36.20 Mean difference = 1.40 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Primary
Outcome domain: Family Economic Self-Sufficiency Outcome Effects
Rating Outcome Measure Effect Sample Timing of Follow-up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Moderate Baby’s father living in the household
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers % = 47.40 % = 50.00 = -2.60 HomeVEE calculated = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Baby’s father living in the household
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers % = 40.20 % = 42.00 = -1.80 HomeVEE calculated = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Married
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers % = 19.80 % = 15.00 = 4.80 HomeVEE calculated = 0.20 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Married
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers % = 19.20 % = 28.70 = -9.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.32 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Receiving AFDC at assessment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 234 mothers % = 50.40 % = 58.00 = -7.60 HomeVEE calculated = -0.19 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Receiving AFDC at assessment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 192 mothers % = 61.30 % = 54.60 = 6.70 HomeVEE calculated = 0.17 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Teen mother was only adult in the household
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers % = 16.40 % = 15.00 = 1.40 HomeVEE calculated = 0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Teen mother was only adult in the household
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers % = 18.50 % = 26.00 = -7.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.26 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Working or in job training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 1 year 234 mothers % = 16.50 % = 18.50 = -2.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Moderate Working or in job training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Teen mothers sample 2 year 194 mothers % = 26.60 % = 29.00 = -2.40 HomeVEE calculated = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary

Study Outcome Measure Summary

Outcome Domain: Child Health Outcome Measures
Rating Outcome Measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure Outcome Type
Moderate

Child had a regular source of medical care

Percentage of children who had a regular source of medical care Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Moderate

Child saw a doctor for well-baby 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

Secondary
Outcome Domain: Child Development and School Readiness Outcome Measures
Rating Outcome Measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure Outcome Type
Moderate

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

Not reported by author

Primary
Outcome Domain: Positive Parenting Practices Outcome Measures
Rating Outcome Measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure Outcome Type
Moderate

HOME:

  • Total score
  • Parental responsivity subscale
  • Acceptance of child’s behavior subscale
  • Appropriate play materials subscale
  • Organization of the environment subscale
  • Involvement with child subscale
  • Opportunities for stimulation subscale
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

Primary
Outcome Domain: Family Economic Self-Sufficiency Outcome Measures
Rating Outcome Measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure Outcome Type
Moderate

Baby’s father living in the household

Percentage of fathers who lived in the same household as the study’s focal child Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Moderate

Married

Percentage of mothers who were married Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Moderate

Receiving AFDC at assessment

Percentage of households that received AFDC Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Moderate

Teen mother was only adult in the household

Percentage of households in which the mother was the only adult Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Moderate

Working or in job training

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

Not applicable

Secondary