Bernard, K., Dozier, M., Bick, J., Lewis-Morrarty, E., Lindhiem, O., & & Carlson, E. (2012). Enhancing attachment organization among maltreated children: Results of a randomized clinical trial. Child Development, 83(2), 623–636.
| Screening decision | Screening conclusion | HomVEE procedures and standards version |
|---|---|---|
| Passes screens | Eligible for review | Version 1 |
| Rating | Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Compromised randomization | Confounding factors | Valid, reliable measure(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moderate | Randomized controlled trial | High | Established on race/ethnicity and SES; outcome(s) not feasible to assess at baseline | None | None | Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed before 2021 |
Information on baseline equivalence for race/ethnicity and SES, attrition, and effect size and significance was based on correspondence with the author.
| Study participants | Parents/caregivers of children younger than 2 with protective services involvement were randomly assigned to the treatment and comparison groups. If the parent or caregiver had two children, both were placed in the parent/caregiver's assigned group. Most of the parents belonged to a minority racial/ethnic group (80 percent), were living in poverty (80 percent), and had less than a high school education (88 percent). 58 percent of the children were male, and 93 percent belonged to minority racial/ethnic groups. |
|---|---|
| Setting | The study was conducted in a large city in the Mid-Atlantic. |
| Intervention services | The intervention, Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC), consisted of 10 hour-long sessions conducted weekly in participants' homes with parents and their children. |
| Comparison conditions | Comparison families received Developmental Education for Families (DEF) in home visits that were the same duration (10 hour-long sessions) and frequency (weekly) as ABC. DEF was designed to enhance cognitive and linguistic development. |
| 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). • Child age (less than 24 months old) |
| Funding sources | NIMH grants R01 MH052135, R01 MH074374, and R01 MH084135 |
| Author affiliation | When the research was conducted, the authors were affiliated with the University of Delaware and the University of Minnesota. |
| Peer reviewed | Peer reviewed status is not listed for manuscripts reviewed before 2021. |
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02093052. Study registration was assessed by HomVEE beginning with the 2014 review.
| Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moderate | Strange Situation Procedure - Disorganized Attachment | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Full analytic sample | Approximately 1 month after program end, or longer if child not yet old enough to measure outcome. | 120 children | Unadjusted proportion = 0.32 | Unadjusted proportion = 0.57 | Mean difference = -0.25 | HomVEE calculated = 0.67 | Statistically significant, p = 0.012 | footnote162Negative value is favorable to the intervention. |
| Moderate | Strange Situation Procedure - Secure Attachment | FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
Full analytic sample | Approximately 1 month after program end, or longer if child not yet old enough to measure outcome. | 120 children | Unadjusted proportion = 0.52 | Unadjusted proportion = 0.33 | Mean difference = 0.19 | HomVEE calculated = 0.46 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.082 | footnote254Effect size and significance based on adjusted odds ratio provided to <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> by the authors. |
