IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/camsys/v1y2005i1p1-104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Parent‐Training Programmes for Improving Maternal Psychosocial Health

Author

Listed:
  • Jane Barlow
  • Esther Coren
  • Sarah Stewart‐Brown

Abstract

The objectives of this systematic review are as follows: a)To establish whether group‐based parenting programmes are effective in improving the emotional and behavioural adjustment of children less than three years of age; b)To assess the role of parenting programmes in the primary prevention of emotional and behavioural problems. Five randomised controlled trials were included in the review, and there were sufficient data from five studies to combine the results in a meta‐analysis. Meta‐analyses were conducted for both parent‐reports and independent assessments of children's behaviour. The findings of this review provide some support for the use of group‐based parenting programmes to improve the emotional and behavioural adjustment of children under the age of 3 years. There is, however, insufficient evidence to reach any firm conclusions regarding the role that such programmes might play in the primary prevention of such problems. Furthermore, there are limited data available concerning the long‐term effectiveness of these programmes, and the results from the two studies for which data were available produced borderline insignificant findings. Further research is required. Synopsis There is evidence from a range of studies to suggest that adverse maternal psychosocial health can have an impact on the parent‐infant relationship and potentially lead to adverse child outcomes in the longer term. Parenting programmes are increasingly being used to promote the well‐being of parents and children, and this review aims to establish whether they can improve maternal psychosocial health in particular. The findings of the review are based on a total of 26 studies and these have been classified into five groups according to the theoretical approach underpinning the programme – behavioural, cognitive‐behavioural, multi‐modal, behavioural‐humanistic and rational‐emotive therapy. The 23 studies produced a total of 64 assessments of maternal health, including measures of maternal depression, anxiety, and self‐esteem. The combined data show that parenting programmes can be effective in improving a range of aspects of maternal psychosocial functioning. While it was not possible to compare the effectiveness of the programmes in the five different categories, all of the programmes reviewed were successful in producing positive change in maternal psychosocial health. Further research is needed to clarify some of the questions arising from this review. Abstract Background Mental health problems are common and there is evidence to suggest that the origins of such problems lie in infancy and childhood. In particular, there is evidence from a range of studies to suggest that maternal psychosocial health can have a significant effect on the mother‐infant relationship, and that this in turn can have consequences for both the short and long‐term psychological health of the child. The use of parenting programmes is increasing in the UK and elsewhere and evidence of their effectiveness in improving outcomes for children has been provided. Evidence is now required of their effectiveness in improving outcomes for mothers. Objectives The objective of this review is to address whether group‐based parenting programmes are effective in improving maternal psychosocial health including anxiety, depression, and self‐esteem. Search strategy A range of biomedical, social science, educational and general reference electronic databases were searched including MEDLINE, EMBASE CINAHL, PsychLIT, ERIC, ASSIA, Sociofile and the Social Science Citation Index. Other sources of information included the Cochrane Library (SPECTR, CENTRAL), and the National Research Register (NRR). Selection criteria Only randomised controlled trials were included in which participants had been randomly allocated to an experimental and a control group, the latter being a waiting‐list, no‐treatment or a placebo control group. Studies had to include at least one group‐based parenting programme, and one standardised instrument measuring maternal psychosocial health. Data collection & analysis A systematic critical appraisal of all included studies was undertaken using a modified version of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published criteria. The treatment effect for each outcome in each study was standardised by dividing the mean difference in post‐intervention scores for the intervention and treatment group, by the pooled standard deviation, to produce an effect size. Where appropriate the results were then combined in a meta‐analysis using a fixed‐effect model, and 95% confidence intervals were used to assess the significance of the findings. Main results A total of 23 studies were included in the original review which was increased to 26 at the first udate (2003). Of these 20 provided sufficient data to calculate effect sizes. The 20 studies provided a total of 64 assessments of outcome on a range of aspects of psychosocial functioning including depression, anxiety, stress, self‐esteem, social competence, social support, guilt, mood, automatic thoughts, dyadic adjustment, psychiatric morbidity, irrationality, anger and aggression, mood, attitude, personality, and beliefs. Data sufficient to combine in a meta‐analysis existed for only five outcomes (depression; anxiety/stress; self‐esteem; social support; and relationship with spouse/marital adjustment). The results of the meta‐analyses show statistically significant results favouring the intervention group for depression; anxiety/stress; self‐esteem; and relationship with spouse/marital adjustment. The meta‐analysis of the social support data showed no evidence of effectiveness. Of the remaining data that it was not possible to combine in a meta‐analysis, approximately 22% of the outcomes measured, showed significant differences between the intervention group and the control group. A further 40% showed non‐significant differences favouring the intervention group. Approximately one‐third of outcomes showed no evidence of effectiveness. A meta‐analysis of the follow‐up data on three outcomes was also conducted ‐ depression, self‐esteem and relationship with spouse/marital adjustment. The results show that there was a continued improvement in self‐esteem, depression, and marital adjustment at follow‐up, although the latter two findings were not statistically significant. This review has been updated (2003) with the addition of 3 new included studies. A number of additional excluded studies have also been added. There is one additional study awaiting assessment and 2 ongoing studies listed for inclusion at a future update of this review. The size of effect for the main outcomes has not been substantially altered by this update. Additional sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of quasi randomised studies on the result have also been added. Where the quasi randomised studies are excluded from the analysis, the result was found to be slightly more conservative. Reviewers’ conclusions It is suggested that parenting programmes can make a significant contribution to the short‐term psychosocial health of mothers. However, there is currently a paucity of evidence concerning whether these results are maintained over time, and the limited follow‐up data which are available show equivocal results. This points to the need for further evidence concerning the long‐term effectiveness of parenting programmes on maternal mental health. Whilst the results of this review are positive overall, some studies showed no effect. Further research is needed to assess which factors contribute to successful outcomes in these programmes with particular attention being paid to the quality of delivery. These results suggest that parenting programmes have a potential role to play in the promotion of mental health.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane Barlow & Esther Coren & Sarah Stewart‐Brown, 2005. "Parent‐Training Programmes for Improving Maternal Psychosocial Health," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 1-104.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:camsys:v:1:y:2005:i:1:p:1-104
    DOI: 10.4073/csr.2005.3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2005.3
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4073/csr.2005.3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ,, 2000. "Problems And Solutions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 287-299, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stevanovic Dalibor, 2016. "Common time variation of parameters in reduced-form macroeconomic models," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 159-183, April.
    2. Wenqing Chen & Melvyn Sim & Jie Sun & Chung-Piaw Teo, 2010. "From CVaR to Uncertainty Set: Implications in Joint Chance-Constrained Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 470-485, April.
    3. A. Fadlelmawla & M. Al-Otaibi, 2005. "Analysis of the Water Resources Status in Kuwait," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 19(5), pages 555-570, October.
    4. Stefan Mišković, 2017. "A VNS-LP algorithm for the robust dynamic maximal covering location problem," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 39(4), pages 1011-1033, October.
    5. Duan, Jinyun & Li, Chenwei & Xu, Yue & Wu, Chia-Huei, 2017. "Transformational leadership and employee voice behavior: a Pygmalion mechanism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68035, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Hota, Monali & Bartsch, Fabian, 2019. "Consumer socialization in childhood and adolescence: Impact of psychological development and family structure," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 11-20.
    7. Abernethy, Margaret A. & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2004. "Power, organization design and managerial behaviour," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 207-225.
    8. Minjiao Zhang & Simge Küçükyavuz & Saumya Goel, 2014. "A Branch-and-Cut Method for Dynamic Decision Making Under Joint Chance Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1317-1333, May.
    9. Peter Burnell, 2008. "From Evaluating Democracy Assistance to Appraising Democracy Promotion," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(2), pages 414-434, June.
    10. M. J. Naderi & M. S. Pishvaee, 2017. "Robust bi-objective macroscopic municipal water supply network redesign and rehabilitation," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(9), pages 2689-2711, July.
    11. Mammassis, Constantinos S. & Kostopoulos, Konstantinos C., 2019. "CEO goal orientations, environmental dynamism and organizational ambidexterity: An investigation in SMEs," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 577-588.
    12. Minghe Sun, 2005. "Warm-Start Routines for Solving Augmented Weighted Tchebycheff Network Programs in Multiple-Objective Network Programming," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 422-437, November.
    13. Viren Swami & Phik-Wern Loo & Adrian Furnham, 2010. "Public Knowledge and Beliefs About Depression Among Urban and Rural Malays in Malaysia," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 56(5), pages 480-496, September.
    14. Jugend, Daniel & da Silva, Sérgio Luis & Salgado, Manoel Henrique & Miguel, Paulo Augusto Cauchick, 2016. "Product portfolio management and performance: Evidence from a survey of innovative Brazilian companies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5095-5100.
    15. Ruiwei Jiang & Siqian Shen & Yiling Zhang, 2017. "Integer Programming Approaches for Appointment Scheduling with Random No-Shows and Service Durations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(6), pages 1638-1656, December.
    16. Mínguez, R. & García-Bertrand, R., 2016. "Robust transmission network expansion planning in energy systems: Improving computational performance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(1), pages 21-32.
    17. Jenny Carolina Saldana Cortés, 2011. "Programación semidefinida aplicada a problemas de cantidad económica de pedido," Documentos CEDE 8735, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    18. Ian Maitland & Mitsuhiro Umezu, 2006. "An Evaluation of Japan's Stakeholder Capitalism," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 22(Spring 20), pages 131-164.
    19. Mikhail A. Sokolovskiy & Xavier J. Carton & Boris N. Filyushkin, 2020. "Mathematical Modeling of Vortex Interaction Using a Three-Layer Quasigeostrophic Model. Part 1: Point-Vortex Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-13, July.
    20. Craig Loschmann & Özge Bilgili & Melissa Siegel, 2019. "Considering the benefits of hosting refugees: evidence of refugee camps influencing local labour market activity and economic welfare in Rwanda," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:camsys:v:1:y:2005:i:1:p:1-104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1891-1803 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.