Long-term effects of Hanen parent programmes: A perspective from Canadian parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proposed study explores the impact of Hanen parent programmes (HPPs) from an often overlooked angle: parents’ self reflection on their parenting skills acquired from Hanen courses. Parental input is a vital component of a child’s development. To date, parent self reflection remains largely unstudied. The proposed study intends to expand academic knowledge of parental reflection of HPPs over time. The present study will examine parental knowledge, attitudes, and confidence from the HPPs in a Canadian context with longitudinal follow-up. Data will be compared at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after parents have completed the HPP. The most noteworthy comparison will be between the first and last months, measuring whether there is a lasting effect of HPPs on parents over time. The expected study results are anticipated to lend support to HPPs as initially effective (i.e. large impact with initial 1 month measurements), but become less effective over time (i.e. smaller impact found at 24 months). The study could provide evidence for follow-up Hanen ‘refresher’ courses where parents receive a brief review of their skills acquired from previous classes to continue optimal family interaction. The reported parental knowledge, perceived attitudes, and perceived confidence is expected to decrease over time. Additional potential implications include providing data for academic research exploring the impact that HPPs have on parents over time. It is predicted that parents’ Hanen-acquired skills continue to evolve as their children develop, but this growth of skills could be supported with additional Hanen course knowledge. There are potential clinical implications for practicing speech-language pathologists (SLPs), who are often the professionals referring parents to HPPs. This proposed study would provide empirical support of the impact that HPPs have on parents (and therefore children); this support is welcome in an evidence-based profession like SLP.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".