CHAMPP4KIDS: Mixed methods study protocol to evaluate acceptability and feasibility of Parenting for Lifelong Health materials in a Canadian context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parents and caregivers play a key role in children's healthy development and well-being. Traditional parenting interventions promote positive parenting practices and are key to preventing child maltreatment. However, numerous barriers can limit access to programs, barriers which were further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Parenting for Lifelong Health group developed mass media and public health communication materials to promote positive caregiving behaviours on a population level. The Champions of Positive Parenting 4 Kids (CHAMPP4KIDS) study will examine the acceptability and feasibility of these materials for service providers and caregivers of children aged 2-6 years in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This study will use a convergent mixed-methods design. Consenting service providers (n = 200) and caregivers (n = 100) will complete a quantitative survey to rate, rank and give feedback on Parenting for Lifelong Health tip sheets and social media ads. Caregivers will also complete self-report scales measuring depression and anxiety. We will hold focus group discussions with a sub-sample of surveyed providers (n = 40) and caregivers (n = 25). An adapted Trials of Improved Practices methodology will explore caregiver perspectives after implementing the tip sheets. Primary quantitative outcomes will be descriptive statistics of rankings, Likert Scale scores and descriptive analysis of caregiver depression and anxiety. Qualitative data will be analyzed using Rapid Qualitative Inquiry and triangulated through a convergent coding matrix. DISCUSSION: The Parenting for Lifelong Health COVID-19 parenting materials offer succinct, engaging parenting information in a mass media format that addresses some challenges associated with accessing in-person programming. The CHAMPP4KIDS study will provide mixed methods insights on the materials' acceptability and feasibility from different groups in a Canadian context, with a focus on marginalized families. The use of Trials of Improved Practices methodology could prove a useful tool for participant-led adaptation of existing parenting, early childhood development and other health intervention materials.
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 | 0.072 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.007 |
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".