MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205298857 · doi:10.2196/27900

Effectiveness of an Internet-Based and Telephone-Assisted Training for Parents of 4-Year-Old Children With Disruptive Behavior: Implementation Research

2021· article· en· W4205298857 on OpenAlexaff
André Sourander, Terja Ristkari, Marjo Kurki, Sonja Gilbert, Susanna Hinkka‐Yli‐Salomäki, Malin Kinnunen, Laura Pulkki-Råbäck, Patrick J. McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersTurun YliopistoAcademy of FinlandEuropean Commission
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Parent trainingChild Behavior ChecklistCBCLClinical psychologyAnxietyMedicineChecklistPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of effectiveness studies when digital parent training programs are implemented in real-world practice. The efficacy of the internet-based and telephone-assisted Finnish Strongest Families Smart Website (SFSW) parent training intervention on the disruptive behavior of 4-year-old children was studied in a randomized controlled trial setting in Southwest Finland between 2011 and 2013. After that, the intervention was implemented nationwide in child health clinics from 2015 onwards. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to compare the treatment characteristics and effectiveness of the SFSW parent training intervention between the families who received the intervention when it was implemented as a normal practice in child health clinics and the families who received the same intervention during the randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The implementation group comprised 600 families who were recruited in the SFSW intervention between January 2015 and May 2017 in real-world implementation. The RCT intervention group comprised 232 families who were recruited between October 2011 and November 2013. The same demographic and child and parent measures were collected from both study groups and were compared using linear mixed-effect models for repeated measurements. The child psychopathology and functioning level were measured using the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) version 1.5-5 for preschool children, the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits (ICU), and a modified version of the Barkley Home Situations Questionnaire. Parenting skills were measured using the 31-item Parenting Scale and the shorter 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). The estimated child and parent outcomes were adjusted for CBCL externalizing scores at baseline, maternal education, duration of the behavior problems, and paternal age. The baseline measurements of each outcome were used as covariates. RESULTS: The implementation group was more likely to complete the intervention than the RCT intervention group (514/600, 85.7% vs 176/232, 75.9%, respectively; P<.001). There were no significant differences between the implementation and RCT intervention groups with regard to child measures, including CBCL externalizing score (-0.2, 95% CI -1.3 to 1.6; P=.83), total score (-0.7, 95% CI -3.0 to 4.5; P=.70), internalizing score (-0.3, 95% CI -1.0 to 1.6; P=.64), and ICU total score (-0.4, 95% Cl -1.9 to 1.2; P=.64). No significant difference was detected in the Parenting Scale total score (0.0, 95% Cl -0.1 to 0.1; P=.50), while DASS-21 total score differed nearly significantly (2.5, 95% Cl 0.0-5.1; P=.05), indicating better improvement in the implementation group. CONCLUSIONS: The internet-based and telephone-assisted SFSW parent training intervention was effectively implemented in real-world settings. These findings have implications for addressing the unmet needs of children with disruptive behavior problems. Our initiative could also provide a quick socially distanced solution for the considerable mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01750996; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01750996. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/1471-2458-13-985.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207