Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Child based outcomes reported by informants other than the child's mother.

From: How evidence-based is an 'evidence-based parenting program'? A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis of Triple P

Paper Number of children/
informants
Informant Nature of child-based outcome measure(s) Significance (P<0.05) of improvement with intervention versu control
Bodenmann et al. [32] 150 Father ECBI Not significant (Intensity and Problem subscales)
Connell et al. [50] 23 Father ECBI Significant benefit (Intensity and Problem subscales)
   Father PDRC - Parent diary record checklist Not significant
Hahlweg et al. [51] 43 Father Child Behavior Checklist--Parent Report (CBCL 1½-5, German version) Not significant
   Father SDQ Not significant
Hahlweg et al. [13] 198 Father CBCL Not significant
  273 Observers Revised Family Observation Schedule (FOS-RIII). Not significant
  177 Teachers Caregiver Teacher Report Form (C-TRF 1.5 - 5) Not significant
Hoath & Sanders [53] 21 Teachers Sutter-Eyberg Student Behavior Inventory-Revised (SESBI-R) Not significant
   Teachers Child Attention Problems Rating Scale (CAP) Not significant
Markie-Dadds & Sanders [56]   Father ECBI Not significant
   Father Parent Daily Report Not significant
Morawska & Sanders [62] 75 Teacher Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Not significant apart from hyperactivity subscale
McTaggart & Sanders [21]   Teacher Sutter-Eyberg Student Behavior Inventory (SESBI) Not significant (except when baseline adjustment used)
Morawska & Sanders [61] 73 Father ECBI Not significant
   Observers Family observation schedule Not significant
Nicholson & Sanders [28] 42 Self report Child Depression Inventory Not significant
   Self report Child Manifest Anxiety Scale Not significant
   Self report Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory Not significant
Plant & Sanders [64] 74 Independent observers Revised Family Observation Schedule (FOS-RIII). Significant benefit on negative behavior subscales (other subscales not reported)
Prinz et al. [5] Approximately 170,000 Child Protective Services Numbers of substantiated child maltreatment cases Significant benefita
   Foster Care System Out of home placements Significant benefita
   Hospitals Hospital visits for maltreatment Significant benefita
   Child Protective Services Maltreatment investigation Not significant
Roberts et al. [33] 23 Father Total behavior problem subscale score of Developmental Behavior Checklist Parent Version. Not significant
  32 Observer FOS-IIIR noncompliance - targeted Not significant
   Observer FOS-IIIR noncompliance - general Significant benefit
   Observer FOS-IIIR Oppositional Behavior - targeted Significant benefit
   Observer FOS-IIIR Oppositional Behavior - general Not significant
   Observer FOS-IIIR Appropriate Behavior - targeted Not significant
   Observer FOS-IIIR Appropriate Behavior - General Not significant
Sanders et al. [65] 255 Father ECBI Significant benefit
   Father Parent Daily Report Significant benefit
   Observer Revised Family Observation Schedule (FOS-RIII). Composite score for negative child behavior Not significant
Stallman & Ralph [25] 36 Teenagers Conflict behavior questionnaire Not significant
Turner & Sanders [68] 25 Independent observers Family Observation Schedule (disruptive behaviors) Not significant
Turner et al. [29] 21 Father Child behavior checklist Not significant
   Observer Mealtime observation Not significant
   Observer Anthropometric measures Not significant
  1. aMethod of analysis not clearly specified. Reported as two-sample t-tests comparing intervention and control counties, presumably of the differences between pre- and post-randomization outcome variables. However, a stratified randomization was used, so the within-pair differences in the change from baseline should be analyzed, though these are not reported. CBCL, Child Behavior Checklist; ECBI, Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory; SDQ, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.