Skip Navigation

Study Detail

Lefever, J. E. B., Bigelow, K. M., Carta, J. J., Borkowski, J. G., Grandfield, E., McCune, L., Irvin, D. W., & Warren, S. F. (2017). Long-term impact of a cell phone-enhanced parenting intervention. Child Maltreatment, 22(4): 305–315.

Model(s) Reviewed: SafeCare: Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training Module, SafeCare: Planned Activities Training Module

Study Screening Details

Screening DecisionScreening Conclusion
Study Passes ScreensEligible for Review

Study Design Details

RatingDesignAttritionBaseline EquivalenceReassignmentConfounding Factors
HighRandomized controlled trialLowEstablished on race/ethnicity and SES; not established on baseline measures of the outcomesNoneNone
Notes:

All outcomes in the comparison of Planned Activities Training vs. control rated high. All outcomes in the comparison of Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training vs. control rated moderate because baseline equivalence on race/ethnicity was not established. Information on baseline equivalence for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status was based on correspondence with the author. All analytical models controlled for baseline measures of the outcome variables. Outcomes assessed at the 6-month follow-up are reported in Carta et al. (2013) and not included in the review of this study. Lefever et al. (2017) reports comparisons of Planned Activities Training vs. Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training, but these are not eligible for review because they isolate the effect of a cellular add-on to a SafeCare module. Note that the study uses “Parent Child Interactions (PCI)” instead of “Planned Activities Training” and “cellular phone-supported version (PCI-C)” instead of “Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training.” The authors note that the PCI intervention was labeled "Planned Activities Training" in other publications. In this review and others, HomVEE continues to use “Planned Activities Training” and “Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training” to remain consistent in reporting findings for SafeCare and related studies.

Study Characteristics

Study Participants Participants were 371 mother-child dyads recruited through health and social services agencies serving low-income families. Eligible mothers had a preschool–aged child and at least one risk factor: less than 18 years of age at child’s birth, less than a high school diploma, receiving financial assistance, or meeting income eligibility for WIC or Head Start. After consent was obtained, dyads were randomized to one of two arms of the home visiting intervention, or to the control group. Mothers in the Planned Activities Training group received the Planned Activities Training module of SafeCare (but were not enrolled in SafeCare more broadly), while mothers in the second arm of the intervention (Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training) received the Planned Activities Training module of SafeCare with the aid of a cell phone for receiving texts and calls from their case manager (but were not enrolled in SafeCare more broadly). A total of 371 mother-child dyads were randomized: 142 into the Planned Activities Training group, 113 into the Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training group, and 116 into the control group. Mother-child dyads were analyzed at 12 months on aspects of positive parenting, child development, and maternal depression. At baseline, average maternal age was 28.9 years, while average child age was 4.6 years. Maternal race/ethnicity was as follows: 46 percent Hispanic; 33 percent African-American; 17 percent White, non-Hispanic; and 4 percent mixed race or Asian. Families’ average annual income was $18,608.
Setting Participants were recruited through health and social services agencies in South Bend, Indiana; Kansas City, Kansas; and Kansas City, Missouri.
Home Visiting Services

Planned Activities Training is the parent training module of SafeCare. This study had two treatment arms. Mothers in the Planned Activities Training group received approximately five Planned Activities Training sessions, twice weekly, while mothers in the Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training group received the same but with the aid of a cell phone, where they received frequent texts and check-in calls from their family coach with encouragements and reminders. In each of these arms, mothers selected two or three daily routines with their children for which they received coaching. On those routines, and more generally, home visiting staff provided coaching, observation, and feedback to promote positive parent-child interactions in daily activities.

Comparison Condition Families assigned to the wait-list control condition received no home visiting services for one year. They were eligible to receive services after completing the 12-month follow-up.
Staff Characteristics and Training Staff training and characteristics were not described in the study.
Funding Source The research and evaluation was supported by Cooperative Agreement U49 CE 001070-0 from the Violence Prevention Branch of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Additional funding was received from the CDC Foundation, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the Health Care Foundation of Greater Kansas City, the AT&T Foundation, and the Spring Foundation.
Author Affiliation The corresponding author is affiliated with the William J. Shaw Center for Children and Families, University of Notre Dame; co-authors are affiliated with the Juniper Gardens Children’s Project, University of Kansas.

Study Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01294475. Study registration was assessed by HomVEE beginning with the 2014 review.

Top

See also…