Evaluating the Strong Families Programme in Lebanon: A Single-arm Study on Family Functioning and Child Well-being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Families in Lebanon face compounded adversities, including political instability, economic collapse, and protracted displacement crises. These conditions place significant strain on caregiver-child relationships, which are critical determinants of child well-being. The Strong Families programme, developed by UNODC, is a brief, evidence-based family skills intervention designed for low-resource and high-stress settings. This study evaluated the programme’s feasibility and effectiveness in Lebanon. A single-arm pre-post design was employed. Seventy-six families with children aged 8–14 years were recruited through community-based organizations across Beirut, Mount Lebanon, and South Lebanon. Caregivers completed a demographic questionnaire, the Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales (PAFAS) and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at baseline (T1), post-intervention (T2), and six-week follow-up (T3). Despite high attrition, results showed significant reductions in SDQ conduct problems and total difficulties, with the greatest improvements among children with high baseline difficulties. PAFAS outcomes indicated significant decreases in coercive parenting and improvements in positive encouragement, parent-child relationship, and parental adjustment among the most challenged caregivers at baseline. Families with lower initial difficulties showed smaller or non-significant changes, suggesting a ceiling effect. No differences emerged between Lebanese and non-Lebanese participants. The Strong Families programme demonstrated feasibility and positive short-term impacts on family functioning and child mental health in Lebanon, particularly for higher-risk families. These findings support its scalability as a contextually adaptable intervention to strengthen resilience in humanitarian and fragile settings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".