Stepping up to COVID-19: A Clinical Trial of a Telepsychology Positive Parenting Program Targeting Behavior Problems in Children With Neurological Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a stepped-care parenting program implemented during COVID-19 among families of behaviorally at-risk children with neurological or neurodevelopmental disorders aged 3-9 years. METHODS: Stepped-care I-InTERACT-North increased psychological support across 3 steps, matched to family needs: (1) guided self-help (podcast), (2) brief support, and (3) longer-term parent support. The intervention was provided by clinicians at The Hospital for Sick Children. Recruitment occurred via hospital and research cohort referral. A single-arm trial using a pragmatic prospective pre-post mixed-method design was utilized to assess accrual, engagement, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. RESULTS: Over 15 months, 68 families enrolled (83% consent rate) and 56 families completed stepped-care (Step 1 = 56; Step 2 = 39; Step 3 = 28), with high adherence across Steps (100%, 98%, and 93%, respectively). Parents reported high acceptability, reflected in themes surrounding accessibility, comprehension, effectiveness, and targeted care. Positive parenting skill increases were documented, and robust improvement in child behavior problems was apparent upon Step 3 completion (p =.001, d = .390). Stepped-care was as effective as traditional delivery, while improving consent and completion rates within a pandemic context. CONCLUSIONS: This stepped-care telepsychology parenting program provides a compelling intervention model to address significant gaps in accessible mental health intervention while simultaneously balancing the need for efficient service. Findings inform program scalability beyond COVID-19 and emphasize the value of stepped-care intervention in delivering and monitoring mental health treatment.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".