Randomized controlled trial of telephone-based cognitive-behavioral therapy on parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developing a sense of parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction is essential for positive parenting and healthy development of the child. The present study evaluated the efficacy of a telephone-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (T-CBT) on parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction at 6 weeks and 6 months postpartum. A multi-site randomized controlled trial was conducted between July 2012 and March 2014. A total of 397 Chinese mothers at risk of postnatal depression were recruited through the postnatal units at three regional public hospitals in Hong Kong and were randomized to receive T- CBT (n = 197) or standard care (n = 200). The T-CBT consisted of five weekly 30-min sessions focusing on changing dysfunctional cognitions and developing problem-solving skills. Parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction were measured by the efficacy and satisfaction subscales of the Parenting Sense of Competence Scale (PSOC-E/S), respectively, at baseline, 6 weeks, and 6 months postpartum. When compared with standard care, T-CBT was associated with a significant improvement in parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction at 6 weeks postpartum (mean difference in PSOC-E: 2.85 [95% CI: 1.72-3.98], p < .001; mean difference in PSOC-S score: 1.61 [95% CI: 0.52-2.71], p = .004), and 6 months (mean difference in PSOC-E score: 3.37 [95% CI: 1.89-4.85], p < .001; mean difference in PSOC-S score: 2.39 [95% CI: 0.96-3.82], p = .001). T-CBT produced significantly greater improvement in parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction than standard care. The results highlight the potential of T-CBT as a promising treatment modality to facilitate maternal adaptation and promote a sense of parenting self-efficacy and satisfaction during the transition to new motherhood.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".