Is the Families First Home Visiting Program Effective in Reducing Child Maltreatment and Improving Child Development?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While home visiting programs are among the most widespread interventions to support at-risk families, there is a paucity of research investigating these programs under real-world conditions. The effectiveness of Families First home visiting (FFHV) was examined for decreasing rates of being in care of child welfare, decreasing hospitalizations for maltreatment-related injuries, and improving child development at school entry. Data for 4,562 children from home visiting and 5,184 comparison children were linked to deidentified administrative health, social services, and education data. FFHV was associated with lower rates of being in care by child's first, second, and third birthday (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] = 0.75, 0.79, and 0.81, respectively) and lower rates of hospitalization for maltreatment-related injuries by third birthday (aRR = 0.59). No differences were found in child development at kindergarten. FFHV should be offered to at-risk families to decrease child maltreatment. Program enhancements are required to improve child development at school entry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".