Family Partner: study protocol for a pilot randomised study of a home-visitation intervention in Norway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Every year, about 5% of children in Norway experience severe child maltreatment and need support from the child welfare services. However, research-supported interventions for this group are lacking. The current study piloted an intensive home-visitation intervention, Family Partner, which aims to reduce child maltreatment among at-risk parents by improving parental skills, agency and trust in the welfare services, and children's well-being. The randomised controlled trial piloted in this study examines the acceptability of the Family Partner intervention for staff and families and evaluates its feasibility for a full-scale randomised controlled trial. METHODS: This protocol outlines a prospective, parallel, pilot randomised trial of the Family Partner intervention in three Norwegian municipal child welfare services. The participants are families with children under 12 years of age, where the parents are identified as having challenges. Families in the treatment group receive the Family Partner intervention, while families in the control group receive ordinary child welfare services. Data are collected at baseline, and at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months after recruitment. The pilot study monitor retention and adherence to inform the feasibility of a future full-scale randomised study. To assess the acceptability of the trial and intervention, a subsample of the participating families, as well as the family partners and representatives of the child welfare services in each municipality, are invited to complete qualitative interviews. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04957394; Pilot Trial of Family Partner: a Child Maltreatment Prevention Intervention (FAMPART); registered on 12 July 2021.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.041 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.149 | 0.021 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".