Evaluation of an early detection tool for social-emotional and behavioral problems in toddlers: The Brief Infant Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment - A cluster randomized trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prevalence of social-emotional and behavioral problems is estimated to be 8 to 9% among preschool children. Effective early detection tools are needed to promote the provision of adequate care at an early stage. The Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) was developed for this purpose. This study evaluates the effectiveness of the BITSEA to enhance social-emotional and behavioral health of preschool children.</p> <p>Methods and Design</p> <p>A cluster randomized controlled trial is set up in youth health care centers in the larger Rotterdam area in the Netherlands, to evaluate the BITSEA. The 31 youth health care centers are randomly allocated to either the control group or the intervention group. The intervention group uses the scores on the BITSEA and cut-off points to evaluate a child's social-emotional and behavioral health and to decide whether or not the child should be referred. The control group provides care as usual, which involves administering a questionnaire that structures the conversation between child health professionals and parents. At a one year follow-up measurement the social-emotional and behavioral health of all children included in the study population will be evaluated.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>It is hypothesized that better results will be found, in terms of social-emotional and behavioral health in the intervention group, compared to the control group, due to more adequate early detection, referral and more appropriate and timely care.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials <a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2035">NTR2035</a></p

Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care

Background Child maltreatment is a significant public health problem. Group Family Nurse Partnership (gFNP) is a new intervention for young, expectant mothers implemented successfully in pilot studies. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of gFNP in reducing risk factors for maltreatment with a potentially vulnerable population. Methods A multi-site randomized controlled parallel-arm trial and prospective economic evaluation was conducted, with allocation via remote randomization (minimization by site, maternal age group) to gFNP or usual care. Participants were expectant mothers aged <20 with at least one live birth, or 20–24 with no live births and with low educational qualifications. Data from maternal interviews at baseline and when infants were two, six and 12 months, and video recording at 12 months, were collected by researchers blind to allocation. Cost information came from weekly logs completed by gFNP family nurses and other service delivery data reported by participants. Primary outcomes measured at 12 months were parenting attitudes (Adult- Adolescent Parenting Index, AAPI-2) and maternal sensitivity (CARE index). The economic evaluation was conducted from a UK NHS and personal social services perspective with cost-effectiveness expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Main analyses were intention to treat with additional complier average causal effects (CACE) analyses. Results Between August 2013 and September 2014, 492 names of potential participants were received of whom 319 were eligible and 166 agreed to take part, 99 randomly assigned to receive gFNP and 67 to usual care. There were no between-arms differences in AAPI-2 total (7·5/10 in both, SE 0.1), difference adjusted for baseline, site and maternal age-group 0·06 (95% CI -0·15 to 0·28, p=0·59) or CARE Index (intervention 4·0 (SE 0·3); control 4·7(SE 0·4); difference adjusted for site and maternal age-group -0·68; 95% CI -1·62 to 0·16, p=0·25) scores. The probability that gFNP is cost-effective based on the QALY measure did not exceed 3%. Conclusions The trial did not support gFNP as a means of reducing the risk of child maltreatment in this population but slow recruitment adversely affected group size and consequently delivery of the intervention

Social referencing and child anxiety: the evolutionary based role of fathers' versus mothers' signals

Children use signals from others to guide their behavior when confronted with potentially dangerous situations, so called social referencing. Due to evolutionary based different expertise of fathers and mothers, parents might be different social references for their children. The present study tested the influence of paternal and maternal social referencing signals on child anxiety. We expected that (1) children would show different social reference processing towards fathers’ and mothers’ signals; (2) in male-specific situations children would be more influenced by paternal signals, and in female-specific situations by maternal signals; (3) boys would respond with more anxiety to female-specific situations, and girls to male-specific situations; (4) high anxious children would be more susceptible to parental, and specifically paternal, social referencing signals than low anxious children. Children aged 8-13 read scripts of ambiguous situations in which the mother/father signaled anxious/confident behavior, and indicated how anxious they would feel. Experiment 1 (n = 129) concerned non-social situations, and Experiment 2 (n = 124) social situations. As expected, children responded with more anxiety to scripts in which their parent acted anxious than to scripts in which their parent acted confident. Children, also high-anxious children, were not differently affected by signals of fathers and mothers. Girls responded with more anxiety than boys in male-typical non-social situations. Congruence between the parent signaling and his/her evolutionary expertise did in general not affect social referencing. In conclusion, independent from parental evolutionary based expertise or from children’s level of anxiety, fathers’ signals have as much influence on their children’s anxiety as mothers’

Efficacy of the Video-feedback Intervention to promote Positive Parenting and Sensitive Discipline in Twin Families (VIPP-Twins): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Intervention programs with the aim of enhancing parenting quality have been found to be differentially effective in decreasing negative child outcomes such as externalizing behavioral problems, resulting in modest overall effect sizes. Here we present the protocol for a randomized controlled trial to examine the efficacy of the Video-feedback Intervention to promote Positive Parenting and Sensitive Discipline for Twin Families (VIPP-Twins) on parenting quality and children’s behavioral control and social competence. In addition, we aim to test the differential susceptibility theory; we examine differential efficacy of the intervention based on genetic make-up or temperament for both parents and children. Lastly, we explore neurobiological mechanisms underlying intervention effects on children’s developmental outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: The original VIPP-SD was adapted for use in families with twins. The VIPP-Twins consists of five biweekly sessions in which the families are visited at home, parent-child interactions are videotaped and parents receive positive feedback on selected video fragments. Families (N = 225) with a same sex twin (mean age = 3.6 years) were recruited to participate in the study. The study consists of four assessments. After two baseline assessments in year 1 and year 2, a random 40 % of the sample will receive the VIPP-Twins program. The first post-test assessment will be carried out one month after the intervention and there will be a long term follow-up assessment two years after the intervention. Measures include observational assessments of parenting and children’s social competence and behavioral control, and neurobiological assessments (i.e., hormonal functioning and neural (re-)activity). DISCUSSION: Results of the study will provide insights in the efficacy of the VIPP-Twins and reveal moderators and mediators of program efficacy. Overall the randomized controlled trial is an experimental test of the differential susceptibility theory. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register: NTR5312; Date registered: July 20, 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40359-016-0139-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Vulnerability genes or plasticity genes?

The classic diathesis–stress framework, which views some individuals as particularly vulnerable to adversity, informs virtually all psychiatric research on behavior–gene–environment (G × E) interaction. An alternative framework of ‘differential susceptibility’ is proposed, one which regards those most susceptible to adversity because of their genetic make up as simultaneously most likely to benefit from supportive or enriching experiences—or even just the absence of adversity. Recent G × E findings consistent with this perspective and involving monoamine oxidase-A, 5-HTTLPR (5-hydroxytryptamine-linked polymorphic region polymorphism) and dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) are reviewed for illustrative purposes. Results considered suggest that putative ‘vulnerability genes’ or ‘risk alleles’ might, at times, be more appropriately conceptualized as ‘plasticity genes’, because they seem to make individuals more susceptible to environmental influences—for better and for worse