Long-term collateral effects of parent programs on child maltreatment proxies:Can administrative data provide useful insights?

Collecting child maltreatment data from participants is expensive and time-consuming, and often suffers from substantial attrition rates. Administrative population data may prove fruitful to overcome these barriers. The aim of this study was twofold: (1) to illustrate how administrative data may be used in evaluating long-term intervention effects; and (2) to examine collateral effects of three preventive early childhood interventions offered to families in the Netherlands (Supportive Parenting, VoorZorg, and Incredible Years). Using population data, four proxies of child maltreatment were assessed to examine collateral intervention effects: incidences of child protection orders, placements of children in residential care, crime victimization of children or their parents, and parental registrations as a crime suspect. The results revealed no significant differences between experimental and control conditions on any of these proxies, with very small effect sizes (ranging from Cramer's V = 0.01 to Cramer's V = 0.10). We conclude that the results do not provide support for collateral effects, but that studying other outcomes may provide this support. We further discuss that small sample sizes and low prevalences challenge studies using administrative data. Notwithstanding these limitations, we conclude that administrative data can strengthen the evidence base for collateral and direct intervention effects.</p

Parents' differential susceptibility to a "micro" parenting intervention: Rationale and study protocol for a randomized controlled microtrial.

BackgroundGiven evidence that parenting can influence children's development, parenting interventions are often the strategy of choice when it comes to treating children's disruptive behavior problems-or preventing problems from developing in the first place. What remains under appreciated, however, is that some parents appear to be more responsive to interventions to foster skilled parenting than others. Notable in this regard is the ever-increasing observational and, perhaps more importantly, experimental evidence indicating that some children prove more susceptible to parenting interventions than others. So, while the experimental evidence clearly indicates that "susceptibility factors" which children carry seem to affect their likelihood of benefiting from a parenting intervention (and other environmental influences), what remains unclear is why the parenting interventions in question prove more effective in changing the behavior of some parents more than others. Could it be as a result of their own parental characteristics?ObjectiveThe Parfective Microtrial in a randomized controlled microtrial, in which we focus not just on parental (and child) responsiveness but also on an underlying physiological mechanism hypothesized to contribute to heightened susceptibility to parenting interventions.MethodsParticipants are 120 families, with children aged 4-5 years, recruited from the community. Of these, 60 are randomly assigned to the "micro" intervention condition (i.e., immediate positive parenting feedback) and 60 families to the care-as-usual control condition. Assessments in both conditions will be conducted at baseline (pretest), after 2 weeks (posttest), and after 4 weeks (follow-up). Primary outcomes are the hypothesized moderating effects of physiology on the anticipated "micro" intervention effect (i.e., decrease in negative parenting behavior and/or increase in positive parenting behavior). Secondary outcomes are the observed (changes in) child behavior in response to the parenting intervention, such that those parents and children-in the same family-who manifest these physiological attributes will prove most susceptible to the beneficial effects of the intervention.Trial registrationThis study protocol is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05539170)

Gene by Environment Research to Prevent Externalizing Problem Behavior : Ethical Questions Raised from a Public Healthcare Perspective

The main public health advantages of examining gene by environment interactions (i.e., G x E) in externalizing behavior lie in the realm of personalized interventions. Nevertheless, the incorporation of genetic data in randomized controlled trials is fraught with difficulties and raises ethical questions. This paper has been written from the perspective of developmental psychologists who, as researchers, see themselves confronted with important and in part new kinds of ethical questions arising from G x E research in social sciences. The aim is to explicate and discuss ethical questions, based on the conviction that what is ethically salient in a research setting will also be relevant in that area of public healthcare incorporating research findings. The ethical questions discussed include: whether it is ethically responsible to withhold an effective treatment; to what extent genetic results should be disclosed; whether researchers should be allowed to collect genetic data of both child and parent; and what are costs and benefits of personalized interventions based on (genetic) screening. We made an attempt to address these questions, but it is up to researchers to determine whether the solutions are suitable for their G x E research in social sciences

Gene by Environment Research to Prevent Externalizing Problem Behavior: Ethical Questions Raised from a Public Healthcare Perspective

The main public health advantages of examining gene by environment interactions (i.e., G x E) in externalizing behavior lie in the realm of personalized interventions. Nevertheless, the incorporation of genetic data in randomized controlled trials is fraught with difficulties and raises ethical questions. This paper has been written from the perspective of developmental psychologists who, as researchers, see themselves confronted with important and in part new kinds of ethical questions arising from G x E research in social sciences. The aim is to explicate and discuss ethical questions, based on the conviction that what is ethically salient in a research setting will also be relevant in that area of public healthcare incorporating research findings. The ethical questions discussed include: whether it is ethically responsible to withhold an effective treatment; to what extent genetic results should be disclosed; whether researchers should be allowed to collect genetic data of both child and parent; and what are costs and benefits of personalized interventions based on (genetic) screening. We made an attempt to address these questions, but it is up to researchers to determine whether the solutions are suitable for their G x E research in social sciences

ORCHIDS: an Observational Randomized Controlled Trial on Childhood Differential Susceptibility

Abstract Background A central tenet in developmental psychopathology is that childhood rearing experiences have a major impact on children’s development. Recently, candidate genes have been identified that may cause children to be differentially susceptible to these experiences (i.e., susceptibility genes). However, our understanding of the differential impact of parenting is limited at best. Specifically, more experimental research is needed. The ORCHIDS study will investigate gene-(gene-)environment interactions to obtain more insight into a) moderating effects of polymorphisms on the link between parenting and child behavior, and b) behavioral mechanisms that underlie these gene-(gene-)environment interactions in an experimental design. Methods/Design The ORCHIDS study is a randomized controlled trial, in which the environment will be manipulated with an intervention (i.e., Incredible Years parent training). In a screening, families with children aged 4–8 who show mild to (sub)clinical behavior problems will be targeted through community records via two Dutch regional healthcare organizations. Assessments in both the intervention and control condition will be conducted at baseline (i.e., pretest), after 6 months (i.e., posttest), and after 10 months (i.e., follow-up). Discussion This study protocol describes the design of a randomized controlled trial that investigates gene-(gene-)environment interactions in the development of child behavior. Two hypotheses will be tested. First, we expect that children in the intervention condition who carry one or more susceptibility genes will show significantly lower levels of problem behavior and higher levels of prosocial behavior after their parent(s) received the Incredible Years training, compared to children without these genes, or children in the control group. Second, we expect that children carrying one or more susceptibility genes will show a heightened sensitivity to changes in parenting behaviors, and will manifest higher emotional synchronization in dyadic interchanges with their parents. This may lead to either more prosocial behavior or antisocial behavior depending on their parents’ behavior. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register (NTR3594)</p

Corrigendum to “Intervention Effectiveness of The Incredible Years: New Insights Into Sociodemographic and Intervention-Based Moderators” [Behavior Therapy 48 (2017) 1–18](S0005789416300521)(10.1016/j.beth.2016.08.002)

The authors regret that the effect sizes in the original manuscript are incorrect. The correct effect sizes, which are on average larger than reported in the original manuscript, are attached to this corrigendum (see corrected Table 4). The corrected effect sizes do not change the interpretation of our results in terms of the effectiveness of The Incredible Years program or the magnitude of the effects (i.e., whether they are small, medium or large). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused

Corrigendum to “Intervention Effectiveness of The Incredible Years: New Insights Into Sociodemographic and Intervention-Based Moderators” [Behavior Therapy 48 (2017) 1–18](S0005789416300521)(10.1016/j.beth.2016.08.002)

The authors regret that the effect sizes in the original manuscript are incorrect. The correct effect sizes, which are on average larger than reported in the original manuscript, are attached to this corrigendum (see corrected Table 4). The corrected effect sizes do not change the interpretation of our results in terms of the effectiveness of The Incredible Years program or the magnitude of the effects (i.e., whether they are small, medium or large). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused

Intervention Effectiveness of The Incredible Years : New Insights Into Sociodemographic and Intervention-Based Moderators

We tested the effectiveness of the preventive behavioral parent training (BPT) program, The Incredible Years (IY), and the independent effects of previously suggested sociodemographic and intervention-based moderator variables (i.e., initial severity of externalizing problem behavior, child gender, social economic status, family composition, and number of sessions parents attended), in a large-scale randomized controlled trial. Questionnaire and observation data from 387 parents and children ages 4–8 years (Mage = 6.21, SD = 1.33, 55.30% boys) across pretest, posttest, and 4-month follow-up were analyzed, using full intention-to-treat analyses and correcting for multiple testing. IY was successful in decreasing parent-reported child externalizing behavior (Cohen's d = 0.20 at posttest, d = 0.08 at follow-up), increasing parent-reported (d = 0.49, d = 0.45) and observed (d = 0.06, d = 0.02) positive parenting behavior, and decreasing parent-reported negative parenting behavior (d = 0.29, d = 0.25). No intervention effects were found for reported and observed child prosocial behavior, observed child externalizing behavior, and observed negative parenting behavior. Out of 40 tested moderation effects (i.e., 8 Outcomes × 5 Moderators), only three significant moderation effects appeared. Thus, no systematic evidence emerged for moderation of IY effects. The present multi-informant trial demonstrated that many previously suggested moderators might not be as potent in differentiating BPT effects as once thought