Effect of the Attachment and Child Health Parent Training Program on Parent–Child Interaction Quality and Child Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to chronic stressors (poverty, addiction, family violence) in early life can derail children's development. Interventions focused on parental reflective function may promote parents' abilities to regulate their feelings and behaviors toward their children and buffer the impact of chronic stressors on children's development by nurturing high-quality parent-child interaction. PURPOSE: To test the effectiveness of parental reflective function-focused intervention entitled Attachment and Child Health on parent-child interaction and child development. METHODS: We conducted two pilots with vulnerable mothers and children <36 months. Randomized controlled trial (n = 20) and quasi-experimental (n = 10) methods tested the effect of Attachment and Child Health on parent-child interaction via Parent-Child Interaction Teaching Scale (PCITS) and on child development via Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ-3) and Ages and Stages Questionnaire-Social Emotional (ASQSE). We employed analysis of covariance and t-tests to examine the outcomes. RESULTS: For randomized controlled trial, we found significant improvements in PCITS parent total, combined total, and cognitive growth fostering scores, and ASQ-3 personal-social scores post-intervention. For quasi-experimental study, we found significant improvements in PCITS combined total, sensitivity to cues, response to child's distress, and responsiveness to caregiver scores. CONCLUSION: Incorporating Attachment and Child Health contributed to effective programming for vulnerable families with young children.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".