Lowell, D. I., Carter, A. S., Godoy, L., Paulicin, B., & Briggs‐Gowan, M. J. (2011). A randomized controlled trial of Child FIRST: A comprehensive home‐based intervention translating research into early childhood practice. Child development, 82(1), 193-208.
| Screening decision | Screening conclusion |
|---|---|
| Passes screens | Eligible for review |
| Rating | Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Reassignment | Confounding factors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Randomized controlled trial | Low | Not Applicable | None | None |
In 2020, HomVEE updated this review to remove family involvement with CPS findings from the Reductions in Child Maltreatment domain because some cases in the abuse complaint may be unsubstantiated. In this domain HomVEE reviews only outcomes focused on substantiated cases of abuse and neglect.
| Study participants | Children were eligible if they were between 6 and 36 months of age; had a positive screening for social-emotional/behavioral problems on the Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) and/or the parent screened high for psychosocial risk; and lived in a permanent caregiving environment in Bridgeport, Connecticut. Of 642 families completing screens, 464 passed the screening, 254 consented to the study, and 157 were randomized (stratified by age, BITSEA score, and family psychosocial risk). There were 78 children in the Child FIRST intervention group and 79 in the usual care comparison group at baseline, 64 (intervention) and 67 (comparison) at the six-month follow-up, and 58 (intervention) and 59 (comparison) at the 12-month follow-up. Fifty-nine percent of mothers in the study were Hispanic, 30 percent were African American, 8 percent were Caucasian, and 4 percent were of another race/ethnicity. |
|---|---|
| Setting | This study took place in Bridgeport, Connecticut. |
| Intervention services | The Child FIRST model has two core components. The first is a connection to a “system of care,” a community-based, comprehensive, coordinated set of services, including early education, health care, and other social services. Second, the program offers a psychotherapeutic approach to promote nurturing caregiving. Services were offered in the home. Two staff members, a clinician and care coordinator, were assigned to each family. The clinician was responsible for therapeutic assessment and intervention with the child and parent and the care coordinator facilitated family engagement in community services. Weekly visits lasting 45 to 90 minutes were made jointly or individually, as needed by the family. |
| Comparison conditions | Comparison families (the usual-care group) continued to receive usual care from the study’s recruitment sites: the Bridgeport Hospital Pediatric Primary Care Center and the Supplementary Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. |
| Staff characteristics and training | The clinical team assigned to each family included a master’s-level developmental/mental health clinician and an associate’s- or bachelor’s-level care coordinator/case manager. The care coordinator/case manager typically had the same racial or ethnic background as the family and spoke the family’s chosen language. |
| Funding sources | Starting Early Starting Smart Prototype (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 9886); Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (60068) |
| Author affiliation | Darcy I. Lowell, a study author, is the founder and executive director of Child FIRST. |
| Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | ITSEA dysregulation | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 18.40 | Mean = 21.40 | Mean difference = -3.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.22 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA dysregulation | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 16.40 | Mean = 20.70 | Mean difference = -4.30 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.36 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA dysregulation (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 7.00 | Adjusted mean % = 15.90 | Difference = -8.90 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.56 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA dysregulation (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 11.30 | Adjusted mean % = 12.70 | Difference = -1.40 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.08 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA externalizing | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 15.40 | Mean = 18.40 | Mean difference = -3.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.30 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA externalizing | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 13.80 | Mean = 18.40 | Mean difference = -4.60 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.49 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA externalizing (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 22.80 | Adjusted mean % = 36.50 | Difference = -13.70 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.40 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA externalizing (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 17.00 | Adjusted mean % = 29.10 | Difference = 12.10 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.42 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA internalizing | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 15.40 | Mean = 15.80 | Mean difference = -0.40 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.13 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA internalizing | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 13.10 | Mean = 14.60 | Mean difference = -1.50 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.19 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA internalizing (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 3.50 | Adjusted mean % = 1.60 | Difference = 1.90 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.49 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | ITSEA internalizing (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 1.90 | Adjusted mean % = 1.80 | Difference = 0.10 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.03 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | Any ITSEA domain (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 26.30 | Adjusted mean % = 44.40 | Difference = -18.10 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.49 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | Any ITSEA domain (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 26.40 | Adjusted mean % = 36.40 | Difference = -10.00 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.28 | p < 0.05 | footnote124HomVEE-calculated p-value is greater than 0.05, indicating that this result is not significant. |
| High | Child language (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 16.90 | Adjusted mean % = 30.30 | OR = 3.00 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.46 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | Child language (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 10.50 | Adjusted mean % = 33.30 | OR = 4.40 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.88 | p < 0.05 |
| Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Percentage of desired services received that were received, child development | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 99.00 | % = 14.00 | Difference = 85.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 3.89 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % = 88.10 | % = 31.80 | Difference = 56.30 | HomeVEE calculated = 3.79 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 91.20 | % = 33.20 | Difference = 58.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 3.93 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received—child mental health | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 93.00 | % = 2.00 | Difference = 91.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 3.93 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, early education | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 88.00 | % = 26.00 | Difference = 62.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 1.84 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, adult education | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 62.00 | % = 9.00 | Difference = 53.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 1.70 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, adult mental health | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 92.00 | % = 7.00 | Difference = 85.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 3.05 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, concrete needs | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 89.00 | % = 16.00 | Difference = 73.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 2.27 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, family support | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 83.00 | % = 9.00 | Difference = 74.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 2.36 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, medical services | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 98.00 | % = 78.00 | Difference = 20.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 1.59 | p < 0.001 | |
| High | Percentage of desired services that were received, social services | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % = 93.00 | % = 56.00 | Difference = 37.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 1.42 | p < 0.001 |
| Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | BSI | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 21.00 | Mean = 35.10 | Mean difference = -14.10 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.56 | p < 0.01 | |
| High | BSI | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 32.70 | Mean = 33.00 | Mean difference = -0.30 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.00 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | BSI (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 14.00 | Adjusted mean % = 39.00 | Difference = -25.00 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.83 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | BSI (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 25.80 | Adjusted mean % = 31.80 | Difference = -6.00 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.18 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | CES-D | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 13.50 | Mean = 17.40 | Mean difference = -3.90 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.45 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | CES-D | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 16.90 | Mean = 18.50 | Mean difference = -1.60 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.20 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | CES-D (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 46.00 | Adjusted mean % = 40.80 | Difference = 5.20 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.13 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | CES-D (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 33.30 | Adjusted mean % = 37.90 | Difference = -4.60 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.12 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI difficult child | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 24.90 | Mean = 25.90 | Mean difference = -1.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.28 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI difficult child | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 23.50 | Mean = 26.50 | Mean difference = -3.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.47 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | PSI difficult child (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 7.10 | Adjusted mean % = 11.90 | Difference = -4.80 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.35 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI difficult child (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 4.80 | Adjusted mean % = 19.70 | Difference = -14.90 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.96 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent distress | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 30.30 | Mean = 33.60 | Mean difference = -3.30 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.47 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent distress | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 29.70 | Mean = 30.40 | Mean difference = -0.70 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.23 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent distress (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 31.80 | Adjusted mean % = 45.50 | Difference = -13.70 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.35 | p < 0.05 | footnote124HomVEE-calculated p-value is greater than 0.05, indicating that this result is not significant. |
| High | PSI parent distress (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 21.40 | Adjusted mean % = 28.80 | Difference = -7.40 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.24 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent-child dysfunction | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 21.60 | Mean = 20.60 | Mean difference = 1.00 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.00 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent-child dysfunction | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 20.40 | Mean = 21.90 | Mean difference = -1.50 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.27 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent-child dysfunction (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 19.10 | Adjusted mean % = 22.70 | Difference = -3.60 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.13 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI parent-child dysfunction (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 21.40 | Adjusted mean % = 17.40 | Difference = 4.40 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.17 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI total score | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | Mean = 76.30 | Mean = 76.90 | Mean difference = -0.60 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.20 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI total score | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | Mean = 74.20 | Mean = 81.90 | Mean difference = -7.70 | HomeVEE calculated = 0.49 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | PSI total score (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 19.60 | Adjusted mean % = 22.00 | Difference = -2.40 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.09 | p > 0.05 | |
| High | PSI total score (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 20.60 | Adjusted mean % = 34.90 | Difference = -14.30 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.44 | p < 0.05 | |
| High | Any PSI scale (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 12 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 32.70 | Adjusted mean % = 44.10 | Difference = -11.40 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.29 | p < 0.05 | footnote124HomVEE-calculated p-value is greater than 0.05, indicating that this result is not significant. |
| High | Any PSI scale (proportion with clinically concerning problems) | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Bridgeport, CT | 6 months | 117 families | % (adjusted) = 38.10 | Adjusted mean % = 57.60 | Difference = -19.50 | HomeVEE calculated = -0.48 | p < 0.05 |
| Outcome measure | Description of measure | Data collection method | Properties of measure |
|---|---|---|---|
ITSEA dysregulation |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). |
Parent/caregiver report |
Not reported by the author |
ITSEA dysregulation (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
ITSEA externalizing |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). |
Parent/caregiver report |
Not reported by the author |
ITSEA externalizing (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). |
Parent/caregiver report |
Not reported by the author |
ITSEA internalizing |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). |
Parent/caregiver report |
Not reported by the author |
ITSEA internalizing (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). |
Parent/caregiver report |
Not reported by the author |
Any ITSEA domain (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Child social-emotional /behavioral problems were assessed with the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (ITSEA). The ITSEA is composed of Internalizing, Externalizing, and Dysregulation (sleep, eating, sensory sensitivities, and negative emotionality) domains. Items are rated on a 3-point scale from not true (1), rarely to very true (2), and often (3). |
Parent/caregiver report |
Not reported by the author |
Child language (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Child language status was assessed using the Infant-Toddler Developmental Assessment (IDA) administered by a trained assessor. The authors reported the percentage of students that fell below the assessments ‘‘Of concern’’ cut-points which are derived from a standardization sample. | Child assessment | Not reported by the author |
| Outcome measure | Description of measure | Data collection method | Properties of measure |
|---|---|---|---|
Percentage of desired services received that were received, child development |
Percentage of families receiving desired child development services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received |
Percentage of families whose wanted service needswere met. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received, early education |
Percentage of families receiving desired early education services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received, adult education |
Percentage of families receiving desired adult education services. |
Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received, adult mental health |
Percentage of families receiving desired adult mental health services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received, concrete needs |
Percentage of families receiving assistance with their assessed concrete needs | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported |
Percentage of desired services that were received, family support |
Percentage of families receiving desired famly support services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received, medical services |
Percentage of families receiving desired medical services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received, social services |
Percentage of families receiving desired social services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Percentage of desired services that were received—child mental health |
Percentage of families receiving desired child mental health services. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
| Outcome measure | Description of measure | Data collection method | Properties of measure |
|---|---|---|---|
BSI |
The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) is designed to assess global psychiatric symptoms. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from not at all to extremely. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
BSI (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) is designed to assess global psychiatric symptoms. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from not at all to extremely. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
CES-D |
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES–D; Radloff, 1977). Items are rated on a 4-point scale from rarely or none of the time to most or all of the time. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
CES-D (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES–D; Radloff, 1977). Items are rated on a 4-point scale from rarely or none of the time to most or all of the time. | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI difficult child |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI difficult child (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI parent distress |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI parent distress (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI parent-child dysfunction |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI parent-child dysfunction (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI total score |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
PSI total score (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
Any PSI scale (proportion with clinically concerning problems) |
Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Short Form is designed to identify parent-child systems that are under stress and are at risk for dysfunction parenting practices. The PSI includes three domains (Parent Distress, Difficult Child,and Parent–Child Dysfunctional) and items are rated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree | Parent/caregiver report | Not reported by the author |
