Smith, J. D., Dishion, T. J., Shaw, D. S., Wilson, M. N., Winter, C. C., & Patterson, G. R. (2014). Coercive family process and early-onset conduct problems from age 2 to school entry. Development and Psychopathology, 26(4 Pt. 1), 917.
Used in Implementation Reports
The study included 731 families that met two criteria. Firs, they participated in the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) when their son or daughter was between 2 years 0 months old and 2 years 11 months old. Second, they met the study’s criteria for being at risk for behavior problems—defined as one standard deviation or more above normative averages in at least two of three domains: (1) child behavior problems (for example, conduct problems or high-conflict relationships with adults); (2) primary caregiver problems (for example, maternal depression, daily parenting challenges, self-report of substance or mental health diagnosis, or status as a teen parent at first birth); and (3) socioeconomic status (a caregiver with low educational achievement or low family income based on WIC criteria). Screening was conducted in 2002 and 2003. Of the 731 primary caregivers who agreed to participate, 50 percent were European American, 28 percent were African American, 13 percent were biracial, and 9 percent were from another racial group. Thirteen percent were Hispanic. More than two-thirds of the randomized sample had an annual income below $20,000. Forty-one percent of the sample had a high school diploma or GED and 24 percent had less than a high school diploma or GED. The 731 children in the study were 29.9 months old on average at the time of the age 2 assessments. Forty-nine percent of the children were female and 58 percent lived in two-parent households.
Families were recruited from WIC program sites in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (37 percent of sample); Eugene, Oregon (37 percent of sample); and Charlottesville, Virginia (26 percent of sample).
Home Visiting Services
The Family Check-Up program typically involves three meetings: an initial contact meeting (a “get to know you” meeting); an assessment meeting, during which families participate in a comprehensive assessment of child and family functioning; and a feedback meeting to discuss the results of the assessment. After the feedback meeting, families can choose to participate in additional follow-up meetings. For this study, the order of the meetings was changed. All families participating in the study were given the comprehensive assessment. The researchers then randomized families into intervention and comparison groups. Following randomization, families in the intervention group participated in the initial contact and feedback meetings, which were led by parent consultants. These consultants discussed family issues and family functioning during the initial contact meeting and, during the feedback meeting, used motivational interviewing techniques to discuss the results of the assessment, areas of strength, areas for improvement, and recommended services that might help the family. After the feedback meetings, families could choose to participate in additional follow-up meetings. Families assigned to the intervention group received the intervention once yearly when their children were 2, 3, 4, and 5 years old.
Families assigned in the comparison group received the Family Check-Up intervention's comprehensive assessment but did not receive any other interventions or services.
Staff Characteristics and Training
Parent consultants for this study had either a master’s or doctorate degree; had previous experience conducting family-based interventions; and were of diverse ethnicities, including Latino, African American, European American, and mixed ethnicity. Consultants were trained for two-and-a-half to three months in strategies that included didactic instruction and role-playing, as well as ongoing videotaped supervision of intervention activity. Consultants were certified by lead parent consultants at each site; the lead consultants were certified by a member of the research team. Certification was repeated annually and was established by reviewing videotapes of feedback and follow-up sessions. Weekly conference calls were held to discuss cases, and annual consultant meetings were held to update training, discuss possible changes in the intervention, and address issues related to families’ needs.
This research was supported by National Institute on Drug Abuse grant DA016110, awarded to Thomas Dishion, Daniel Shaw, and Melvin Wilson. Justin Smith received support from research training grant T32 MH20012 from the National Institute of Mental Health, awarded to Elizabeth Stormshak.
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: None found. Study registration was assessed by HomVEE beginning with the 2014 review.
Smith, J. D., Dishion, T. J., Shaw, D. S., Wilson, M. N., Winter, C. C., & Patterson, G. R. (2014)
Not established on race/ethnicity, SES, or baseline measures of the outcomes.
Randomized controlled trial