Parenting on the border: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of a trauma-informed, edutainment-enhanced intervention to improve parenting and mental health among migrant and displaced caregivers in Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is currently a lack of evidence-based interventions with a dual focus on improving parenting and caregiver mental health in conflict and humanitarian settings. To address this gap, we co-designed a trauma-informed, edutainment-enhanced intervention to improve both parenting and mental health outcomes among migrant and displaced caregivers on the Thailand-Myanmar border. This paper outlines the study protocol for a pragmatic, community-based type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation superiority randomized controlled trial with 480 caregivers individually randomized to the intervention or treatment as usual arms in a 1:1 ratio. Caregivers assigned to the intervention arm will be invited to a 6-session group intervention delivered by non-specialist facilitators. Primary outcomes for the trial are (1) positive parenting behaviour; (2) physical and psychological violence against children; and (3) caregiver psychological distress. Secondary outcomes include parenting knowledge, beliefs, and efficacy, caregiver engagement in young children’s early learning, family functioning, social support, post-traumatic stress symptoms, emotion regulation, psychological flexibility, well-being, and children’s internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Outcomes will be assessed at 3 time points: baseline, 1-month post-intervention, and 6-month follow up. A mixed methods process evaluation and cost effectiveness analysis are embedded within the trial to assess intervention delivery, acceptability, potential mechanisms of change, and cost effectiveness. The study was prospectively registered with the Thai Clinical Trials Registry on 25 July 2024 ( TCTR20240725001 ).
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 | 0.036 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.087 | 0.012 |
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".