MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interventions with fathers of young children: systematic literature review

2006· review· en· W2155023150 on OpenAlexaff
Joyce Magill‐Evans, Margaret J. Harrison, Gwen R. Rempel, Linda Slater

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPsychological interventionPsycINFOIntervention (counseling)Child developmentKangaroo careInclusion (mineral)MEDLINEMedicineDevelopmental psychologySystematic reviewPsychologyChild psychotherapyMassageNursingAlternative medicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: This paper reports a systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions for fathers with infants or toddlers. BACKGROUND: Nurses and other healthcare professionals work closely with families of infants and young children. This contact provides an opportunity to promote positive parent-child interactions and optimal child development. Previous research has demonstrated that interventions with mothers of infants can be effective in promoting sensitive, responsive parent-child interactions and positive child development. Recent research has indicated that fathers also contribute to child development, but little is known about what types of interventions with fathers are effective in promoting sensitive, responsive father-child interactions. METHODS: Literature from 1983 to 2003 in the Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases was searched to locate intervention studies published in English that included a control group or used a pretest and post-test design; measured an aspect of father-child interaction; analysed father outcomes separately from mother outcomes; had a sample greater than one; and included infants or toddlers. Additional studies were located by cross-checking reference lists. RESULTS: Fourteen papers describing 12 interventions met the inclusion criteria. The interventions included infant massage, observation and modelling of behaviour with infant, kangaroo care, participation with child in a preschool programme, discussion groups, and parent training programmes. CONCLUSION: Although the number of intervention studies is limited, there is evidence that, if interventions involve active participation with or observation of the father's own child, the intervention may be effective in enhancing the father's interactions with the child and a positive perception of the child. There is less information on how interventions influence child development. More research is needed to determine the influence of interventions over time, the differential influence on mothers and fathers, and the optimal dose of intervention required.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations118
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207