Effects of a parenting intervention to address maternal psychological wellbeing and child development and growth in rural Uganda: a community-based, cluster-randomised trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Parenting interventions have been implemented to improve the compromised developmental potential among 39% of children younger than 5 years living in low-income and middle-income countries. Maternal wellbeing is important for child development, especially in children younger than 3 years who are vulnerable and dependent on their mothers for nutrition and stimulation. We assessed an integrated, community-based parenting intervention that targeted both child development and maternal wellbeing in rural Uganda. METHODS: In this community-based, cluster randomised trial, we assessed the effectiveness of a manualised, parenting intervention in Lira, Uganda. We selected and randomly assigned 12 parishes (1:1) to either parenting intervention or control (inclusion on a waitlist with a brief message on nutrition) groups using a computer-generated list of random numbers. Within each parish, we selected two to three eligible communities that had a parish office or a primary school in which a preschool could be established, more than 75 households with children younger than 6 years, and at least 15 socially disadvantaged families (ie, maternal education of primary school level or lower) with at least one child younger than 36 months. Participants within communities were mother-child dyads, where the child was 12-36 months of age at enrollment, and the mother had low maternal education. In the parenting intervention group, participants attended 12 fortnightly peer-led group sessions focusing on child care and maternal wellbeing. The primary outcomes were cognitive and receptive language development, as measured with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 3rd edn. Secondary outcomes included self-reported maternal depressive symptoms, using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, and child growth. Theoretically-relevant parenting practices, including the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment inventory, and mother-care variables, such as perceived spousal support, were also assessed as potential mediators. Baseline assessments were done in January, 2013, and endline assessments were done in November, 2013, 3 months after completion of the programme. Ethics approval was received from Mbarara and McGill universities. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01906606. FINDINGS: Between December, 2012, and January, 2013, 13 communities (194 dyads) were randomly assigned to receive intervention, and 12 communities (154 dyads) were assigned to a waitlist control. 319 dyads completed baseline measures (171 in the intervention group and 148 in the control group), and 291 dyads completed endline measures (160 in the intervention group and 131 in the control group). At endline, children in the intervention group had significantly higher cognitive scores (58·90 vs 55·65, effect size 0·36, 95% CI 0·12-0·59) and receptive language scores (23·86 vs 22·40, 0·27, 0·03-0·50) than did children in the control group. Mothers in the intervention group reported significantly fewer depressive symptoms (15·36 vs 18·61, -0·391, 95% CI -0·62 to -0·16) than did mothers in the control group. However, no differences were found in child growth between groups. INTERPRETATION: The 12 session integrated parenting intervention delivered by non-professional community members improved child development and maternal wellbeing in rural Uganda. Because this intervention was largely managed and implemented by a local organisation, using local community members and minimal resources, such a programme has the potential to be replicated and scaled up in other low-resource, village-based settings. FUNDING: Plan Uganda via Plan Finland (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and Plan Australia (Australian Aid).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».