MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315817701 · doi:10.2196/43885

Evaluating the Effects of the Supportive Parenting App on Infant Developmental Outcomes: Longitudinal Study

2023· article· en· W4315817701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shefaly Shorey, Yap Seng Chong, Luming Shi, Jing Shi Chua, Jancy Mathews, Siew Hoon Lim, Ruochen Du, Yiong Huak Chan, Thiam Chye Tan, Cornelia Yin Ing Chee, Evelyn Law

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialChild developmentMotor skillDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyLongitudinal studyAffect (linguistics)Intervention (counseling)Social supportNormativeClinical psychologyPediatricsMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have investigated the various effects of parenting on infant developmental outcomes. In particular, parental stress and social support have been found to significantly affect the growth of the newborn. Although many parents today use mobile apps to obtain more support in parenting and perinatal care, few studies have examined how these apps could affect infant development. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of the Supportive Parenting App (SPA) in improving infant developmental outcomes during the perinatal period. METHODS: This study adopted a 2-group parallel prospective longitudinal design and recruited 200 infants and their parents (N=400 mothers and fathers). The parents were recruited at 24 weeks of gestation for a randomized controlled trial conducted from February 2020 to July 2022. They were randomly allocated to either the intervention or control group. The infant outcome measures included cognition, language, motor skills, and social-emotional development. Data were collected from the infants when they were aged 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12 months. Linear and modified Poisson regressions were used to analyze the data to examine between- and within-group changes. RESULTS: At 9 and 12 months post partum, the infants in the intervention group were found to have better communication and language skills than those in the control group. An analysis of motor development revealed that a larger proportion of the infants in the control group fell under the at-risk category, where they scored approximately 2 SDs below the normative scores. The control group infants scored higher on the problem solving domain at 6 months post partum. However, at 12 months postpartum, the infants in the intervention group performed better on cognitive tasks than those in the control group. Despite not being statistically significant, the intervention group infants were found to have consistently scored better on the social components of the questionnaires than the control group infants. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the infants whose parents had received the SPA intervention tended to fare better in most developmental outcome measures than those whose parents had received standard care only. The findings of this study suggest that the SPA intervention exerted positive effects on the communication, cognition, motor, and socioemotional development of the infants. Further research is needed to improve the content and support provided by the intervention to maximize the benefits gained by infants and their parents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04706442; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04706442.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207