Risk and protective factors to early childhood development during the COVID-19 pandemic

Moderating effect of social risk on the relationship between biological risk and child development

Human development is influenced by the interaction between biological and social factors. This study aimed to verify the moderating effect of social risk on the relationship between biological risk and child development. Data were collected on 201 children, aged 6 to 72 months. The independent variable was measured by the biological risk index, and the moderator variable by the social risk index was assessed by the Denver II test. Linear regression, effect size, and analysis of moderation were used to verify the relationship between BRI and the child development (Denver II), and the moderating effect of the SRI. BRI was negatively associated with child development, the interaction between the BRI and SRI increased the explained variance in the Denver II result to 14%. The SRI was also a significant moderator of the Language and Gross Motor domains. This research evidence that social risk moderates the relationship between biological risk and child development, the more social risk factors, the stronger this relationship becomes. On the other hand, it can be said that some social factors favor child development, even in the presence of biological risk factors.

Scaling up a home-visiting program for child development in Brazil: a comparative case studies analysis

Background

In 2016, Brazil scaled up the Criança Feliz Program (PCF, from the acronym in Portuguese), making it one of the largest Early Childhood Development (ECD) programs worldwide. However, the PCF has not been able to achieve its intended impact. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to achieving the PCF implementation outcomes across the RE-AIM dimensions (Reach, Effectiveness or Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This comparative case study analysis selected five contrasting municipalities based on population size, region of the country, implementation model, and length of time implementing the PCF. We conducted 244 interviews with PCF municipal team (municipal managers, supervisors, home visitors), families, and cross-sectoral professionals. A rapid qualitative analysis was used to identify themes across RE-AIM dimensions.

Findings

Families' limited knowledge and trust in PCF goals were a barrier to its reach. While the perceived benefit of PCF on parenting skills and ECD enabled reach, the lack of referral protocols to address social needs, such as connecting food-insecure families to food resources, undermined effectiveness. Questions about whether the social assistance sector should be in charge of PCF challenged its adoption. Implementation barriers exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic included low salaries, temporary contracts, high turnover, infrequent supervision, lack of an effective monitoring system, and nonexistence or non-functioning multisectoral committees. The absence of institutionalized funding was a challenge for sustainability.

Interpretation

Complex intertwined system-level barriers may explain the unsuccessful implementation of PCF. These barriers must be addressed for Brazil to benefit from the enormous reach of the PCF and the evidence-based nurturing care principles it is based upon.

Funding

NIH/NICHD.