Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant Meets HHS Criteria

Model effectiveness research report last updated: 2020

Effects shown in research

Child development and school readiness

Findings rated high

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Strange Situation Procedure - Disorganized attachment

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

7 months post-intervention

ABC-I vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

109 children Unadjusted proportion = 0.33 Unadjusted proportion Unadjusted proportion = 0.45 Unadjusted proportion Mean difference = -0.12 HomVEE calculated = -0.31

Not statistically significant, p= 0.17

Findings rated moderate

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Strange Situation Procedure - Disorganized Attachment
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Approximately 1 month after program end, or longer if child not yet old enough to measure outcome. Full analytic sample 120 children Unadjusted proportion = 0.32 Unadjusted proportion = 0.57 Mean difference = -0.25 HomVEE calculated = 0.67 Statistically significant, p = 0.012

footnote162

Submitted by user on

Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Strange Situation Procedure - Secure Attachment
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Approximately 1 month after program end, or longer if child not yet old enough to measure outcome. Full analytic sample 120 children Unadjusted proportion = 0.52 Unadjusted proportion = 0.33 Mean difference = 0.19 HomVEE calculated = 0.46 Not statistically significant, p = 0.082

footnote254

Submitted by user on

Effect size and significance based on adjusted odds ratio provided to <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> by the authors.

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Strange Situation Procedure - Secure attachment

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

First post-intervention visit where child was at least 1-year old (range 11.8 to 31.9 months old)

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Delaware

105 children Adjusted proportion = 0.52 Adjusted proportion = 0.32 Mean difference = 0.20 HomVEE calculated = 0.43

Statistically significant, p= 0.03

Model controls for child gender and cumulative social risk index.

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child emotion lability/negativity

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.08

Not statistically significant, p= 0.73

Model controls for mutual positive affect at 24 months, child risk, parent risk (0 to 24 months), and instability risk (0 to 24 months).

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child emotion lability/negativity

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.04

Not statistically significant, p= 0.85

Model controls for mutual positive affect at 24 months, child risk, parent risk (0 to 24 months), parent risk (8 to 10 years), instability risk (0 to 24 months), and instability risk (8 to 10 years).

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child emotion lability/negativity

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.10

Not statistically significant, p= 0.67

Model does not include statistical controls.

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child emotion lability/negativity

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.04

Not statistically significant, p= 0.87

Model controls for mutual positive affect at 24 months.

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child positive emotion regulation

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.13

Not statistically significant, p= 0.55

Model controls for mutual positive affect at 24 months, child risk, parent risk (0 to 24 months), parent risk (8 to 10 years), instability risk (0 to 24 months), and instability risk (8 to 10 years).

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child positive emotion regulation

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.07

Not statistically significant, p= 0.75

Model does not include statistical controls.

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child positive emotion regulation

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.05

Not statistically significant, p= 0.83

Model controls for mutual positive affect at 24 months.

Emotion Regulation Checklist - Child positive emotion regulation

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 8

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Philadelphia

80 children Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.16

Not statistically significant, p= 0.48

Model controls for mutual positive affect at 24 months, child risk, parent risk (0 to 24 months), and instability risk (0 to 24 months).

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Child compliance composite

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

36 months of age

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

101 mother/child dyads Unadjusted mean = 0.26 Unadjusted mean = -0.21 Mean difference = 0.47 Study reported = 0.53

Statistically significant, p= 0.01

Authors used ANOVA to estimate the difference between the ABC and DEF groups; effect size is Cohen's D.

Child compliance: child touched toys

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

36 months of age

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

101 mother/child dyads Unadjusted proportion = 0.33 Unadjusted proportion = 0.54 Mean difference = -0.21 Study reported = -0.52

Statistically significant, p <.05

Authors used Chi-Square Test of significance to estimate the difference between the ABC and DEF groups.

Child compliance: duration of child touching toys (seconds)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

36 months of age

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

101 mother/child dyads Unadjusted mean = 4.35 Unadjusted mean = 11.78 Mean difference = -7.43 Study reported = -0.42

Statistically significant, p= 0.04

Authors used ANOVA to estimate the difference between the ABC and DEF groups; effect size is Cohen's D.

Child compliance: latency to child touching toys (seconds)

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

36 months of age

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

101 mother/child dyads Unadjusted mean = 263.47 Unadjusted mean = 199.89 Mean difference = 63.58 Study reported = 0.68

Statistically significant, p= 0.00

Authors used ANOVA to estimate the difference between the ABC and DEF groups; effect size is Cohen's D.

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Strange Situation Procedure - Disorganized attachment

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

7 months after enrollment (1 month post-intervention)

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

105 children Unadjusted proportion = 0.32 Unadjusted proportion = 0.46 Mean difference = -0.14 HomVEE calculated = -0.34

Not statistically significant, p= 0.16

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Infant
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Kerns Security Scale - Attachment security

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 9

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

100 children Unadjusted mean = 3.49 Unadjusted mean Unadjusted mean = 3.28 Unadjusted mean Mean difference = 0.21 HomVEE calculated = 0.46

Statistically significant, p= 0.02

Model does not include statistical controls.

Kerns Security Scale - Attachment security

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

Age 9

ABC-Infant vs. DEF; Large mid-Atlantic city

100 children Adjusted mean = 3.49 Adjusted mean Adjusted mean = 3.28 Adjusted mean Mean difference = 0.21 HomVEE calculated = 0.48

Statistically significant, p= 0.02

Model controls for receipt of financial assistance from the government.

Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up (ABC) -Toddler
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) - Receptive Vocabulary

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

36 months of age

ABC-Toddler vs. DEF; Delaware

32 children Unadjusted mean = 93.60 Unadjusted mean = 80.30 Mean difference = 13.30 HomVEE calculated = 0.86

Statistically significant, p= 0.02

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) - Receptive Vocabulary

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

48 months of age

ABC-Toddler vs. DEF; Delaware

53 children Unadjusted mean = 99.60 Unadjusted mean = 97.00 Mean difference = 2.60 HomVEE calculated = 0.17

Not statistically significant, p= 0.52

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) - Receptive Vocabulary

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

60 months of age

ABC-Toddler vs. DEF; Delaware

58 children Unadjusted mean = 105.10 Unadjusted mean = 95.50 Mean difference = 9.60 HomVEE calculated = 0.60

Statistically significant, p= 0.03

View Revisions