Mechanisms of Change in Population-Based Parenting Interventions for Children and Adolescents

Parenting, Child Maltreatment, and Social Disadvantage: A Population-Based Implementation and Evaluation of the Triple P System of Evidence-Based Parenting Support

Child Maltreatment (CM) is a widespread public health problem, with adverse outcomes for children, families, and communities. Evidence-based parenting support delivered via a public health approach may be an effective means to prevent CM. The Every Family 2 population trial applied a public health approach to delivering evidence-based parenting support to prevent CM in disadvantaged communities. Using a quasi-experimental design, 64 matched low socioeconomic communities in the Australian states of Queensland and New South Wales received either the full multi-level Triple P system (TPS) of parenting support, or Care as Usual (CAU). Two population indicators of CM, the number of substantiated cases of CM, and the number of notifications of CM to protective services were compared using Welch's t-test to evaluate intervention effectiveness. After two years of intervention, medium to large effect sizes favoring TPS communities were found for substantiations (d = 0.57, p < .05) and notifications (d = 1.86, p < .001). These findings show the value of the TPS, deployed using a public health approach, in efforts to prevent CM in socially disadvantaged communities. A number of uncontrolled contextual factors are described that may have contributed to some of the differences detected between TPS and CAU communities.

Mandated Parent Education: Applications, Impacts, and Future Directions

Mandated participation in parent education programs is a common practice across the United States for families who are undergoing divorce or who are involved in the child welfare or juvenile justice systems. Mandates to participate in parenting programs create substantial challenges for families, service providers, and service systems. Furthermore, the type and quality of the parenting services accessed vary widely, and their impacts need to be better understood. To address this need, an overview of the current state of the empirical literature on the impacts and outcomes of mandated parenting interventions for divorce and in child welfare and juvenile justice settings is provided, and suggestions to the field are offered to refine research related to mandated parenting programs. Given the challenges that mandated parenting programs pose, an alternative approach that views parenting through a public health lens is highlighted to build on the growing body of research on the impacts of population-wide applications of parenting support programs, and as a possible way to decrease the number of parents who are required to attend parenting programs. Opportunities to advance universal parenting support within a range of community settings, including primary care, early childhood education, and community mental health systems are offered. Gaps in knowledge regarding mechanisms of action of universal supports and impacts on the number of parents mandated to treatment are highlighted, and future directions for research in this area are suggested.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of an adapted intervention for preschoolers with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities displaying behaviours that challenge: the EPICC-ID RCT

Background

Stepping Stones Triple P is an adapted intervention for parents of young children with developmental disabilities who display behaviours that challenge, aiming at teaching positive parenting techniques and promoting a positive parent-child relationship.

Objective

To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P in reducing behaviours that challenge in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities.

Design, setting, participants

A parallel two-arm pragmatic multisite single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited a total of 261 dyads (parent and child). The children were aged 30-59 months and had moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Participants were randomised, using a 3 : 2 allocation ratio, into the intervention arm (Stepping Stones Triple P; n = 155) or treatment as usual arm (n = 106). Participants were recruited from four study sites in Blackpool, North and South London and Newcastle.

Intervention

Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P consists of six group sessions and three individual phone or face-to-face contacts over 9 weeks. These were changed to remote sessions after 16 March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Main outcome measure

The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist, which assesses the severity of behaviours that challenge.

Results

We found a small non-significant difference in the mean Child Behaviour Checklist scores (-4.23, 95% CI -9.98 to 1.52, p = 0.146) in the intervention arm compared to treatment as usual at 12 months. Per protocol and complier average causal effect sensitivity analyses, which took into consideration the number of sessions attended, showed the Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference at 12 months was lower in the intervention arm by -10.77 (95% CI -19.12 to -2.42, p = 0.014) and -11.53 (95% CI -26.97 to 3.91, p = 0.143), respectively. The Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference between participants who were recruited before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was estimated as -7.12 (95% CI -13.44 to -0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI -5.43 to 20.64), respectively (p = 0.046), suggesting that any effect pre-pandemic may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no differences in all secondary measures. Stepping Stones Triple P is probably value for money to deliver (-£1057.88; 95% CI -£3218.6 to -£46.67), but decisions to roll this out as an alternative to existing parenting interventions or treatment as usual may be dependent on policymaker willingness to invest in early interventions to reduce behaviours that challenge. Parents reported the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and benefit from peer support. There were 20 serious adverse events reported during the study, but none were associated with the intervention.

Limitations

There were low attendance rates in the Stepping Stones Triple P arm, as well as the coronavirus disease 2019-related challenges with recruitment and delivery of the intervention.

Conclusions

Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P did not reduce early onset behaviours that challenge in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, there was an effect on child behaviours for those who received a sufficient dose of the intervention. There is a high probability of Stepping Stones Triple P being at least cost neutral and therefore worth considering as an early therapeutic option given the long-term consequences of behaviours that challenge on people and their social networks.

Future work

Further research should investigate the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and subsequent outcomes.

Study registration

This study is registered as NCT03086876 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876?term=Hassiotis±Angela&draw=1&rank=1).

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

What Do We Know About Depression Among Youth and How Can We Make Progress Toward Improved Understanding and Reducing Distress? A New Hope

This paper summarizes many findings about depression among children and adolescents. Depression is prevalent, highly distressing, and exerts considerable burden worldwide. Rates surge from childhood through young adulthood and have increased over the last decade. Many risk factors have been identified, and evidence-based interventions exist targeting mostly individual-level changes via psychological or pharmacological means. At the same time, the field appears stuck and has not achieved considerable progress in advancing scientific understanding of depression's features or delivering interventions to meet the challenge of youth depression's high and growing prevalence. This paper adopts several positions to address these challenges and move the field forward. First, we emphasize reinvigoration of construct validation approaches that may better characterize youth depression's phenomenological features and inform more valid and reliable assessments that can enhance scientific understanding and improve interventions for youth depression. To this end, history and philosophical principles affecting depression's conceptualization and measurement are considered. Second, we suggest expanding the range and targets of treatments and prevention efforts beyond current practice guidelines for evidence-based interventions. This broader suite of interventions includes structural- and system-level change focused at community and societal levels (e.g., evidence-based economic anti-poverty interventions) and personalized interventions with sufficient evidence base. We propose that by focusing on the FORCE (Fundamentals, Openness, Relationships, Constructs, Evidence), youth depression research can provide new hope.

Treatment of childhood disruptive behavior disorders and callous-unemotional traits: a systematic review and two multilevel meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Children with callous-unemotional (CU) traits are at high lifetime risk of antisocial behavior. It is unknown if treatments for disruptive behavior disorders are as effective for children with CU traits (DBD+CU) as those without (DBD-only), nor if treatments directly reduce CU traits. Separate multilevel meta-analyses were conducted to compare treatment effects on DBD symptoms for DBD+CU versus DBD-only children and evaluate direct treatment-related reductions in CU traits, as well as to examine moderating factors for both questions.

METHODS

We systematically searched PsycINFO, PubMed, Cochran Library (Trials), EMBASE, MEDLINE, APA PsycNet, Scopus, and Web of Science. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, and uncontrolled studies evaluating child-focused, parenting-focused, pharmacological, family-focused, or multimodal treatments.

RESULTS

Sixty studies with 9,405 participants were included (Mage  = 10.04, SDage  = 3.89 years, 25.09% female, 44.10% racial/ethnic minority). First, treatment was associated with similar reductions in DBD symptoms for DBD+CU (SMD = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.45, 1.72) and DBD-only (SMD = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.64). However, DBD+CU started (SMD = 1.18, 95% CI = 0.57, 1.80) and ended (SMD = 0.73, p < .001; 95% CI = 0.43, 1.04) treatment with more DBD symptoms. Second, although there was no overall direct effect of treatment on CU traits (SMD = .09, 95% CI = -0.02, 0.20), there were moderating factors. Significant treatment-related reductions in CU traits were found for studies testing parenting-focused components (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.06, 0.35), using parent-reported measures (SMD = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.04, 0.28), rated as higher quality (SMD = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.39), conducted outside the United States (SMD = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.05, 0.32), and with less than half the sample from a racial/ethnic minority group (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.002, 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

DBD+CU children improve with treatment, but their greater DBD symptom severity requires specialized treatment modules that could be implemented alongside parenting programs. Conclusions are tempered by heterogeneity across studies and scant evidence from randomized controlled trials.