The Pittsburgh Study: A Tiered Model to Support Parents during Early Childhood.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Journal of Pediatrics Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1016/j.jpeds.2024.114396
Chelsea Weaver Krug, Alan L Mendelsohn, Jordan Wuerth, Erin Roby, Daniel S Shaw
{"title":"The Pittsburgh Study: A Tiered Model to Support Parents during Early Childhood.","authors":"Chelsea Weaver Krug, Alan L Mendelsohn, Jordan Wuerth, Erin Roby, Daniel S Shaw","doi":"10.1016/j.jpeds.2024.114396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To test the feasibility of implementing The Pittsburgh Study's (TPS) Early Childhood Collaborative, a population-level, community-partnered initiative to promote relational health by offering accessible preventive parenting program options for families with young children.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>TPS partnered with healthcare and community agencies serving families in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, to enroll and screen 878 parents of 1040 children 4-years-old and under. Participants were assigned to 1 of 4 tiered groups based on identified needs: (1) universal, (2) targeted/universal, (3) secondary/tertiary, or (4) tertiary programs. Parents were offered choices in empirically supported parenting programs within group ranging from texting programs to intensive home visiting. Program selection was optional. Chi-square tests were conducted to examine the likelihood of selecting a program by group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>About 25% of participants were assigned to each tiered group; 78% of parents chose to enroll in a parenting program. In general, parents with higher levels of adversity were more likely to select a parenting program compared with those reporting less adversity, including secondary/tertiary vs targeted/universal groups (81.4% vs 72.8%), and tertiary vs universal and targeted/universal groups (83% vs 74.1% and 72.8%, respectively; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our high program enrollment rate supports the feasibility of TPS. TPS successfully engaged families in the study by offering choices in, and optimizing accessibility to, parenting programs. TPS is highly aligned with recent recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics for tiered approaches as part of a broad public health strategy for supporting early relational health.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The Pittsburgh Study Early Childhood (TPS-ECC): NCT05444205.</p>","PeriodicalId":54774,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"114396"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2024.114396","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To test the feasibility of implementing The Pittsburgh Study's (TPS) Early Childhood Collaborative, a population-level, community-partnered initiative to promote relational health by offering accessible preventive parenting program options for families with young children.

Study design: TPS partnered with healthcare and community agencies serving families in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, to enroll and screen 878 parents of 1040 children 4-years-old and under. Participants were assigned to 1 of 4 tiered groups based on identified needs: (1) universal, (2) targeted/universal, (3) secondary/tertiary, or (4) tertiary programs. Parents were offered choices in empirically supported parenting programs within group ranging from texting programs to intensive home visiting. Program selection was optional. Chi-square tests were conducted to examine the likelihood of selecting a program by group.

Results: About 25% of participants were assigned to each tiered group; 78% of parents chose to enroll in a parenting program. In general, parents with higher levels of adversity were more likely to select a parenting program compared with those reporting less adversity, including secondary/tertiary vs targeted/universal groups (81.4% vs 72.8%), and tertiary vs universal and targeted/universal groups (83% vs 74.1% and 72.8%, respectively; P < .001).

Conclusions: Our high program enrollment rate supports the feasibility of TPS. TPS successfully engaged families in the study by offering choices in, and optimizing accessibility to, parenting programs. TPS is highly aligned with recent recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics for tiered approaches as part of a broad public health strategy for supporting early relational health.

Trial registration: The Pittsburgh Study Early Childhood (TPS-ECC): NCT05444205.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
匹兹堡研究:支持幼儿期父母的分层模式。
目的测试实施匹兹堡研究(TPS)儿童早期协作项目的可行性。该项目是一项人口层面的社区合作计划,旨在通过为有年幼子女的家庭提供方便的预防性育儿项目选择来促进关系健康:研究设计:TPS 与宾夕法尼亚州阿勒格尼县为家庭提供服务的医疗保健和社区机构合作,招募并筛选了 878 名有 1040 名 4 岁及以下儿童的家长。根据已确定的需求,参与者被分配到四个分层组中的一个:(1)普及组;(2)目标/普及组;(3)二级/三级组;或(4)三级组。家长可在组内选择经验支持的育儿计划,包括短信计划和强化家访。项目选择是非强制性的。结果显示,约有 25% 的参与者被分配到了不同的项目组:结果:约 25% 的参与者被分配到各分层小组;78% 的家长选择参加亲职教育项目。一般来说,与逆境程度较轻的家长相比,逆境程度较高的家长更有可能选择亲职教育项目,包括二级/三级组与目标/普及组(81.4%对72.8%),以及三级组与普及组和目标/普及组(分别为83%对74.1%和72.8%;P < .001):我们的高计划注册率证明了 TPS 的可行性。TPS 通过提供育儿计划的选择并优化其可及性,成功地让家庭参与到研究中来。TPS 与美国儿科学会(American Academy of Pediatrics)最近提出的分层方法建议高度一致,是支持早期关系健康的广泛公共卫生战略的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pediatrics
Journal of Pediatrics 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.00%
发文量
696
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pediatrics is an international peer-reviewed journal that advances pediatric research and serves as a practical guide for pediatricians who manage health and diagnose and treat disorders in infants, children, and adolescents. The Journal publishes original work based on standards of excellence and expert review. The Journal seeks to publish high quality original articles that are immediately applicable to practice (basic science, translational research, evidence-based medicine), brief clinical and laboratory case reports, medical progress, expert commentary, grand rounds, insightful editorials, “classic” physical examinations, and novel insights into clinical and academic pediatric medicine related to every aspect of child health. Published monthly since 1932, The Journal of Pediatrics continues to promote the latest developments in pediatric medicine, child health, policy, and advocacy. Topics covered in The Journal of Pediatrics include, but are not limited to: General Pediatrics Pediatric Subspecialties Adolescent Medicine Allergy and Immunology Cardiology Critical Care Medicine Developmental-Behavioral Medicine Endocrinology Gastroenterology Hematology-Oncology Infectious Diseases Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Emergency Medicine Pulmonology Rheumatology Genetics Ethics Health Service Research Pediatric Hospitalist Medicine.
期刊最新文献
Letter to the Editor: Infant Botulism - Correction to "Cognitive Bias in an Infant with Constipation". Esophageal Atresia with Tracheoesophageal Fistula Is Associated with Consanguinity in the Bedouins of the Negev. Balancing Blood Product Wastage and Patient Safety: Primum Non Nocere. Blood Product Wastage and Exchange Transfusion: Caveat Medicus. The Multidimensional Condition of Systemic Cooling Poverty Affecting Children's Health Worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1