A randomized waitlist control trial of the Make the Connection <sup>®</sup> online program for caregivers of infants and young children: Study protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: (MTC), an evidence-based parenting program, has been delivered in-person by child-caring professionals to over 120,000 parents to improve positive parenting behaviours and attitudes. Recently, MTC has been adapted into a 'direct to caregiver' online platform to increase scalability and accessibility. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the online modality of MTC in increasing parenting knowledge, attitudes, and the perceived relationship with their child, and to understand barriers and facilitators to its access. Methods: Two hundred caregivers with children aged 0-3 years old will be recruited through Public Health agencies in Ontario, Canada. Participants will be randomly placed in the intervention or waitlist control group. Both groups will complete a battery of questionnaires at study enrolment and 8 weeks later. The intervention group will receive the MTC online program during the 8-week period, while the waitlist group will receive the program after an 8-week wait. The study questionnaires will address demographic information, caregivers' relational attitudes towards their infant, self-competence in their caregiver role, depression, and caregiver stress, as well as caregivers' and infants' emotion regulation. Discussion: Results from this study will add critical knowledge to the development, scaling, and roll out of the MTC online program, thus increasing its capacity to reach a greater number of families. Trial registration: The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 15 March 2023 (NCT05770414).
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.004 |
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".