MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210309241 · doi:10.2196/preprints.24861

A Web-Based and In-Person Risk Reframing Intervention to Influence Mothers’ Tolerance for, and Parenting Practices Associated With, Children’s Outdoor Risky Play: Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

2020· preprint· en· W4210309241 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mariana Brussoni, Christina S. Han, Yingyi Lin, John Jacob, Ian Pike, Anita Bundy, Guy Faulkner, Jennifer L. Gardy, Brian Fisher, Louise C. Mâsse

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialPsychologySocial cognitive theoryDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Outdoor risky play, such as climbing, racing, and independent exploration, is an important part of childhood and is associated with various positive physical, mental, and developmental outcomes for children. Parental attitudes and fears, particularly mothers’, are a major deterrent to children’s opportunities for outdoor risky play. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 2 versions of an intervention to reframe mothers’ perceptions of risk and change parenting behaviors: a web-based intervention or an in-person workshop, compared with the control condition. METHODS The Go Play Outside! randomized controlled trial was conducted in Canada from 2017 to 2018. Participants were recruited through social media, snowball sampling, and community notices. Mothers of children aged 6-12 years were self-assessed through eligibility questions, and those eligible and consented to participate in the study were randomized into a fully automated web-based intervention, the in-person workshop, or the control condition. The intervention was underpinned by social cognitive theory, incorporating behavior change techniques. Participants progressed through a series of self-reflection exercises and developed a goal for change. Control participants received the Position Statement on Active Outdoor Play. The primary outcome was increase in tolerance of risky play and the secondary outcome was goal attainment. Data were collected online via REDCap at baseline, 1 week, and 3 months after the intervention. Randomization was conducted using sealed envelope. Allocations were concealed to researchers at assignment and data analysis. We conducted mediation analyses to examine whether the intervention influenced elements of social cognitive theory, as hypothesized. RESULTS A total of 451 mothers were randomized and completed baseline sociodemographic assessments: 150 in the web-based intervention, 153 in the in-person workshop, and 148 in the control condition. Among these, a total of 351 mothers completed the intervention. At 1 week after the intervention, 113, 85, and 135 mothers completed assessments for each condition, respectively, and at 3 months after the intervention, 105, 84, and 123 completed the assessments, respectively. Compared with mothers in the control condition, mothers in the web-based intervention had significantly higher tolerance of risky play at 1 week (P=.004) and 3 months after the intervention (P=.007); and mothers in the in-person workshop had significantly higher tolerance of risky play at 1 week after the intervention (P=.02). No other significant outcomes were found. None of the potential mediators were found to significantly mediate the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS The trial demonstrates that the web-based intervention was effective in increasing mothers’ tolerance for risk in play. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03374683; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03374683 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.1186/s13063-018-2552-4

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207