Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®

Model effectiveness research report last updated: 2024

Effects shown in research

Child development and school readiness

Findings rated high

Eckenrode, J., Campa, M., Luckey, D. W., Henderson, C. R., Cole, R., Kitzman, H., Anson, E., Sidora-Arcoleo, K., Powers, J., & Olds, D. (2010). Long-term effects of prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation on the life course of youths: 19-year follow-up of a randomized trial. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164(1), 9-15.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Binge drinking	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira); Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	117 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.21	Adjusted proportion = 0.24	Mean difference = -0.03	HomVEE calculated = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p = 0.67	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Binge drinking	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 36.00	Adjusted mean % = 32.00	Difference = 0.04	Study reported = 0.11	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Binge drinking	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	%(adjusted) = 28.00	Adjusted mean % = 32.00	Difference = -0.03	Study reported = -0.10	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Ever been pregnant	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira); Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	116 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.41	Adjusted proportion = 0.42	Mean difference = -0.01	HomVEE calculated = -0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.93	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Ever been pregnant/made a girl pregnant	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 32.40	Adjusted mean % = 30.90	Difference = 1.50	Study reported = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Ever been pregnant/made a girl pregnant	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	% (adjusted) = 32.40	Adjusted mean % = 31.60	Difference = 0.80	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Ever fathered a child/given birth	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	%(adjusted) = 21.20	Adjusted mean % = 20.70	Difference = 0.50	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Ever fathered a child/given birth	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 18.10	Adjusted mean % = 20.70	Difference = -2.60	Study reported = -0.10	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Ever given birth	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira); Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	116 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.27	Adjusted proportion = 0.29	Mean difference = -0.02	HomVEE calculated = -0.05	Not statistically significant, p = 0.86	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Frequency of birth control use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	Adjusted mean = 4.90	Adjusted mean = 4.60	Mean difference = 0.30	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Frequency of birth control use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	Adjusted mean = 4.70	Adjusted mean = 4.60	Mean difference = 0.10	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Frequency of condom use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	Adjusted mean = 3.90	Adjusted mean = 3.30	Mean difference = 0.60	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Frequency of condom use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	Adjusted mean = 3.70	Adjusted mean = 3.30	Mean difference = 0.40	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Graduated from high school	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira); Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	117 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.81	Adjusted proportion = 0.73	Mean difference = 0.09	HomVEE calculated = 0.30	Not statistically significant, p = 0.29	Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Graduated from high school	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 81.60	Adjusted mean % = 74.50	Difference = 7.10	Study reported = 0.25	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Graduated from high school	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	%(adjusted) = 70.60	Adjusted mean % = 74.50	Difference = -3.90	Study reported = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Illicit drug use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira); Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	117 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.48	Adjusted proportion = 0.52	Mean difference = -0.04	HomVEE calculated = -0.11	Not statistically significant, p = 0.65	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Illicit drug use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 53.00	Adjusted mean % = 52.00	Difference = 0.01	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Illicit drug use	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	%(adjusted) = 49.00	Adjusted mean % = 52.00	Difference = -0.03	Study reported = -0.08	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Number of sex partners, past year	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira); Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	115 children	Adjusted mean = 1.40	Adjusted mean = 1.40	Mean difference = 0.00	HomVEE calculated = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 1.00	Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Number of sex partners, past year	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	Adjusted mean = 1.73	Adjusted mean = 1.55	Mean difference = 0.18	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Number of sex partners, past year	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	Adjusted mean = 1.68	Adjusted mean = 1.55	Mean difference = 0.13	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Eckenrode, J., Zielinski, D., Smith, E., Marcynyszyn, L. A., Henderson, C. R., Kitzman, H., et al. (2001). Child maltreatment and the early onset of problem behaviors: Can a program of nurse home visitation break the link? Development and Psychopathology, 13(4), 873–890.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Number of early onset of problem behaviors	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	228 adolescents	Not available	Not available	OR = 0.28	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.12	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High. Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 The discussion of outcomes in the text of this study implies that the direction of the effect is in the opposite direction than what is reported in the study and replicated here.

Enoch, M. A., Kitzman, H., Smith, J. A., Anson, E., Hodgkinson, C. A., Goldman, D., & Olds, D. L. (2016). A prospective cohort study of influences on externalizing behaviors across childhood: Results from a nurse home visiting randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(5), 376–382.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Composite externalizing disorders (ED) continuous total scores: Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) (12-year follow-up)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse home-visited vs. comparison, Memphis sample	559 children	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Statistical significance is based on information the authors provided in the text.
Composite externalizing disorders (ED) continuous total scores: Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) (2-year follow-up)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 years	Nurse home-visited vs. comparison, Memphis sample	587 children	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not available	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Statistical significance and favorability are based on information the authors provided in the text.
Composite externalizing disorders (ED) continuous total scores: Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) (6-year follow-up)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home-visited vs. comparison, Memphis sample	575 children	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Statistical significance is based on information the authors provided in the text.

Holmberg, John; Luckey, Dennis; Olds, David. (2011) Teacher data for the Denver Year-9 follow-up. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance
Math Grades: Parent Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	374 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 3.14	Unadjusted mean = 3.21	Mean difference = -0.07	Study reported = -0.11	p-value = 0.32
Reading Grades: Parent Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	375 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 3.14	Unadjusted mean = 3.18	Mean difference = -0.04	Study reported = -0.05	p-value = 0.62

Kitzman, H. J., Olds, D. L., Cole, R. E., Hanks, C. A., Anson, E. A., Arcoleo, K. J., Luckey, D. W., Knudtson, M. D., Henderson, C. R., & Holmberg, J. R. (2010). Enduring effects of prenatal and infancy home visiting by nurses on children: Follow-up of a randomized trial among children at age 12 years. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164(5), 412–418.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
GPA (reading and math) (grades 1-6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 2.46	Mean = 2.27	Mean difference = 0.20	HomVEE calculated = 3.32	Statistically significant, p < .05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
GPA (reading and math) (grades 1–6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	Mean = 2.48	Mean = 2.39	Mean difference = 0.09	HomVEE calculated = 2.07	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
GPA (reading and math) (grades 4-6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 2.27	Mean = 2.08	Mean difference = 0.19	HomVEE calculated = 2.83	Statistically significant, p < .05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
GPA (reading and math) (grades 4–6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	Mean = 2.28	Mean = 2.20	Mean difference = 0.08	HomVEE calculated = 1.70	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
PIAT scores (reading and math) at 12 years	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	568 children	Mean = 89.24	Mean = 87.96	Mean difference = 1.27	HomVEE calculated = 2.25	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
PIAT scores (reading and math) at 12 years	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 88.78	Mean = 85.70	Mean difference = 3.07	HomVEE calculated = 3.91	Statistically significant, p < .05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
Conduct grades (grades 1-6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 2.93	Mean = 2.86	Mean difference = 0.07	HomVEE calculated = 1.61	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
Conduct grades (grades 1–-6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	Mean = 2.95	Mean = 2.89	Mean difference = 0.06	HomVEE calculated = 1.79	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Conduct grades (grades 4-6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 2.91	Mean = 2.86	Mean difference = 0.05	HomVEE calculated = 0.93	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
Conduct grades (grades 4–6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	Mean = 2.95	Mean = 2.88	Mean difference = 0.07	HomVEE calculated = 1.87	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
Ever placed in special education (grades 1-6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	% = 15.00	% = 15.00	OR = 0.97	HomVEE calculated = -0.02	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Percentages adjusted for covariates in the model (household poverty and maternal childrearing attitudes).
Ever placed in special education (grades 1–6)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	% (adjusted) = 14.80	Adjusted mean % = 9.80	OR = 1.61	HomVEE calculated = 0.28	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Ever retained	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	% = 23.00	% = 27.00	OR = 0.77	HomVEE calculated = -0.16	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Percentages adjusted for covariates in the model (household poverty and maternal childrearing attitudes).
Ever retained	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	% (adjusted) = 24.90	Adjusted mean % = 20.80	OR = 1.26	HomVEE calculated = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Externalizing disorders	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers, 578 children, and 548 teachers	% (adjusted) = 19.70	Adjusted mean % = 17.80	OR = 1.13	HomVEE calculated = 0.08	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Externalizing disorders	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	% (adjusted) = 24.00	Adjusted mean % = 22.00	OR = 1.12	HomVEE calculated = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Group achievement test scores (reading and math) (grades 1-6), percentile1	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 40.52	Mean = 34.85	Mean difference = 5.67	HomVEE calculated = 3.39	Statistically significant, p < .05
Group achievement test scores (reading and math) (grades 1–6), percentile	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	578 children	Mean = 42.34	Mean = 39.79	Mean difference = 2.55	HomVEE calculated = 2.12	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
Group achievement test scores (reading and math) (grades 4-6), percentile1	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 36.86	Mean = 33.67	Mean difference = 3.19	HomVEE calculated = 1.87	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Group achievement test scores (reading and math) (grades 4–6), percentile	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	635 children	Mean = 39.37	Mean = 38.27	Mean difference = 1.09	HomVEE calculated = 0.89	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Outcome examined with repeated measures.
Incidence of days of substance use in the past 30 days	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	578 children	= 0.03	= 0.18	IR = 0.15	Not available	Statistically significant, p < .05
Internalizing disorders	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	%(adjusted) = 32.00	Adjusted mean % = 36.00	OR = 0.81	HomVEE calculated = -0.13	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Internalizing disorders	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	578 children	%(adjusted) = 22.10	Adjusted mean % = 30.90	OR = 0.63	HomVEE calculated = -0.28	Statistically significant, p < .05
Leiter-R Sustained Attention test scaled score	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	Mean = 8.63	Mean = 8.72	Mean difference = -0.09	HomVEE calculated = -0.39	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Leiter-R Sustained Attention test scaled score	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	578 children	Mean = 8.68	Mean = 8.75	Mean difference = -0.07	HomVEE calculated = -0.42	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Number of substances used in the past 30 days	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	578 children	= 0.02	= 0.08	IR = 0.06	Not available	Statistically significant, p < .05
Total problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers, 578 children, and 548 teachers	% (adjusted) = 23.70	Adjusted mean % = 19.80	OR = 1.26	HomVEE calculated = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Total problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	326 mothers	% (adjusted = 30.00	Adjusted mean % = 27.00	OR = 1.17	HomVEE calculated = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Used cigarettes, alcohol, or marijuana in the past 30 days	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	578 children	%(adjusted) = 1.70	Adjusted mean % = 5.10	OR = 0.31	HomVEE calculated = -0.69	Statistically significant, p < .05

Kitzman, H., Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R., Hanks, C., Cole, R., Tatelbaum, R., et al. (1997). Effect of prenatal and infancy home visitation by nurses on pregnancy outcomes, childhood injuries, and repeated childbearing. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(8), 644–652.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance
CBCL (total score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 years postnatal	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	1082 children	Adjusted mean = 46.00	Adjusted mean = 49.20	Mean difference = -3.20	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID (total score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 years postnatal	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	1082 children	Adjusted mean = 94.50	Adjusted mean = 94.30	Mean difference = 0.20	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05

Kitzman, H., Olds, D. L., Knudtson, M. D., Cole, R., Anson, E., Smith, J. A., Fishbein, D., DiClemente, R., Wingood, G., Caliendo, A. M., Hopfer, C., Miller, T., & Conti, G. (2019). Prenatal and/or infancy nurse home visiting and 18-year outcomes of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 144(6). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-3876

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Externalizing Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	574 children	Unadjusted proportion = 0.21	Unadjusted proportion = 0.18	Mean difference = 0.02	HomVEE calculated = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.50	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Externalizing Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	611 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.08	Adjusted proportion = 0.07	Odds ratio = 1.13	HomVEE calculated = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p= 0.72	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Internalizing Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	577 children	Unadjusted proportion = 0.25	Unadjusted proportion = 0.32	Mean difference = -0.07	HomVEE calculated = -0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Internalizing Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	625 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.17	Adjusted proportion = 0.18	Odds ratio = 0.92	HomVEE calculated = -0.05	Not statistically significant, p= 0.73	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Internalizing Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	618 children	Unadjusted proportion = 0.13	Unadjusted proportion = 0.15	Mean difference = -0.02	HomVEE calculated = -0.08	Not statistically significant, p = 0.62	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Total Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	575 children	Unadjusted proportion = 0.25	Unadjusted proportion = 0.21	Mean difference = 0.04	HomVEE calculated = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.31	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Total Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	611 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.07	Adjusted proportion = 0.04	Odds ratio = 1.60	HomVEE calculated = 0.28	Not statistically significant, p= 0.22	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), Total Behavior Problems (borderline or clinical threshold)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	616 children	Unadjusted proportion = 0.03	Unadjusted proportion = 0.06	Mean difference = -0.03	HomVEE calculated = -0.48	Not statistically significant, p = 0.11	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) Externalizing Behavior Problems, borderline or clinical threshold	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	620 children	Unadjusted proportion = 0.18	Unadjusted proportion = 0.20	Mean difference = -0.02	HomVEE calculated = -0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.51	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Any positive STI laboratory test result	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	319 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.26	Adjusted proportion = 0.23	Odds ratio = 1.16	HomVEE calculated = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p= 0.60	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Any positive STI laboratory test result	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Child gender (boys)	286 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.15	Adjusted proportion = 0.15	Odds ratio = 0.95	HomVEE calculated = -0.03	Not statistically significant, p= 0.89	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Current drug use in the past month or positive lab test result	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	613 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.51	Adjusted proportion = 0.48	Odds ratio = 1.11	HomVEE calculated = 0.06	Not statistically significant, p= 0.55	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention. Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Facial Emotion Recognition Task, Emotion recognition	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	617 children	Adjusted mean = 53.75	Adjusted mean = 52.55	Mean difference = 1.20	Study reported = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p= 0.08
Facial Emotion Recognition Task, Emotion recognition	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	329 children	Adjusted mean = 54.19	Adjusted mean = 52.32	Mean difference = 1.87	Study reported = 0.22	Statistically significant, p= 0.04
Graduated from high school	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.71	Adjusted proportion = 0.70	Odds ratio = 1.06	HomVEE calculated = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p= 0.83	Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Graduated from high school	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	619 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.76	Adjusted proportion = 0.72	Odds ratio = 1.21	HomVEE calculated = 0.12	Not statistically significant, p= 0.35	Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Graduated with honors	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	619 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.09	Adjusted proportion = 0.04	Odds ratio = 2.12	HomVEE calculated = 0.46	Statistically significant, p= 0.03	Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
Graduated with honors	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.08	Adjusted proportion = 0.03	Odds ratio = 3.34	HomVEE calculated = 0.73	Statistically significant, p= 0.02	Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55 HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.
HIV risk	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	604 children	Adjusted mean = -13.77	Adjusted mean = -13.50	Mean difference = -0.27	Study reported = -0.08	Not statistically significant, p= 0.38	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III), Receptive language	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	621 children	Adjusted mean = 82.34	Adjusted mean = 81.60	Mean difference = 0.74	Study reported = 0.05	Not statistically significant, p= 0.55
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III), Receptive language	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	331 children	Adjusted mean = 82.32	Adjusted mean = 79.02	Mean difference = 3.30	Study reported = 0.24	Statistically significant, p= 0.05
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III), Receptive language	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	323 children	Unadjusted mean = 81.13	Unadjusted mean = 79.49	Mean difference = 1.64	HomVEE calculated = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.28	Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III), Receptive language	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014, full sample	612 children	Unadjusted mean = 83.65	Unadjusted mean = 82.49	Mean difference = 1.16	HomVEE calculated = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.31	Submitted by nwu on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:31 Statistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations.
Time to first live birth	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Child gender (boys)	305 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.08	Adjusted proportion = 0.06	Incidence rate = 0.01	Study reported = 1.20	Not statistically significant, p= 0.62
Time to first live birth	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	324 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.14	Adjusted proportion = 0.17	Incidence rate = -0.03	Study reported = 0.80	Not statistically significant, p= 0.44
Time to first pregnancy	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Child gender (boys)	305 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.15	Adjusted proportion = 0.17	Incidence rate = -0.02	Study reported = 0.86	Not statistically significant, p= 0.57
Time to first pregnancy	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	18 years	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT, Memphis TN, 1990-2014; Subgroup: Child gender (girls)	324 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.23	Adjusted proportion = 0.26	Incidence rate = -0.04	Study reported = 0.85	Not statistically significant, p= 0.46

Knox, V., & Michalopoulos, C. (2023). Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE), United States, 2012-2019. MIHOPE Model Results Documentation [Study 3-NFP contrast]. Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37848.v3.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Brief Infant Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA), total competence score	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-month follow-up	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample	932 children	Adjusted mean = 27.50	Adjusted mean = 27.60	Difference = -0.10	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.
Received any early intervention services (%)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-month follow-up	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample	910 mothers	Adjusted proportion = 0.04	Adjusted proportion = 0.04	Difference = 0.00	Study reported = -0.05	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.
Use of nonparental child care	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-month follow-up	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States,full sample	905 children	Adjusted proportion = 0.51	Adjusted proportion = 0.56	Difference = -0.05	Study reported = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	The statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons is reported; precise p-values are not available.

Michalopoulos, C., Faucetta, K., Hill, C. J., Portilla, X., Burrell, L., Lee, H., Duggan, A., & Knox, V. (2019). Impacts on family outcomes of evidence-based early childhood home visiting: Results from the Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (OPRE Report 2019-07). [Study 3-NFP contrast]. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/opre/mihope_impac….

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Brief Infant Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA), total problem score (fixed effect random slope analysis)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15 months old	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample	929 children	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Study reported = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p= 0.11	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Brief Infant Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA), total problem score (restricted maximum likelihood analysis)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15 months old	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample	929 children	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Study reported = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p= 0.16	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Brief Infant Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA), total problem score (split-sample analysis)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15 months old	NFP vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample	929 children	Not reported	Not reported	Difference = 0.02	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p= 0.69	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.

Olds, D. L., Henderson Jr., C. R., Chamberlin, R., & Tatelbaum, R. (1986). Preventing child abuse and neglect: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. Pediatrics, 78, 65–78.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance
BSID MDI	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison	204 children	Adjusted mean = 111.23	Adjusted mean = 109.94	Mean difference = 1.29	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID Mental Development Index (MDI)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison	199 children	Adjusted mean = 105.44	Adjusted mean = 109.94	Mean difference = -4.50	Not available	Statistical significance not reported
Cattell	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison	193 children	Adjusted mean = 109.34	Adjusted mean = 106.49	Mean difference = 2.85	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Cattell	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison	186 children	Adjusted mean = 105.73	Adjusted mean = 106.49	Mean difference = -0.76	Not available	Statistical significance not reported
Crying (mother-reported number of episodes last 2 weeks)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	164 children	Adjusted mean = 4.05	Adjusted mean = 3.93	Mean difference = 0.12	Not available	Statistical significance not reported
Crying (mother-reported number of episodes last 2 weeks)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	163 children	Adjusted mean = 3.44	Adjusted mean = 3.93	Mean difference = -0.49	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Mother- reported positive mood	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	199 children	Adjusted mean = 2.34	Adjusted mean = 2.29	Mean difference = 0.05	Not available	Statistical significance not reported
Mother-reported positive mood	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	209 children	Adjusted mean = 2.40	Adjusted mean = 2.29	Mean difference = 0.11	Not available	Statistically significant, p < 0.05

Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R., & Kitzman, H. (1994). Does prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation have enduring effects on qualities of parental caregiving and child health at 25 to 50 months of life? Pediatrics, 93(1), 89–98.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Number of child behavioral/parental coping problems in physician record (25 to 50 months)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	50 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	221 mothers	Adjusted mean = 0.39	Adjusted mean = 0.71	Mean difference = -0.32	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ .01	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Number of child behavioral/parental coping problems in physician record (25 to 50 months)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	50 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	209 mothers	Adjusted mean = 0.43	Adjusted mean = 0.71	Mean difference = -0.28	Not available	Statistical significance not reported
Stanford Binet	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	36 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	226 children	Adjusted mean = 104.20	Adjusted mean = 101.95	Mean difference = 2.25	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Stanford Binet	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	36 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	236 children	Adjusted mean = 103.57	Adjusted mean = 101.95	Mean difference = 1.62	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Stanford Binet	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	48 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	226 children	Adjusted mean = 111.25	Adjusted mean = 108.93	Mean difference = 2.32	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Stanford Binet	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	48 months	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	236 children	Adjusted mean = 111.52	Adjusted mean = 108.93	Mean difference = 2.59	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R., Cole, R., Eckenrode, J., Kitzman, H., Luckey, D., et al. (1998). Long-term effects of nurse home visitation on children’s criminal and antisocial behavior: 15-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(14), 1238–1244.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Alcohol and drug impairment (mother report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15 year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.28	Adjusted mean = 0.18	Mean difference = -0.10	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.68
Alcohol and drug impairment (mother report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	277 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.20	Adjusted mean = 0.18	Mean difference = 0.02	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.96
Alcohol impairment (self-report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.47	Adjusted mean = 0.52	Mean difference = -0.05	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.35
Alcohol impairment (self-report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.50	Adjusted mean = 0.52	Mean difference = -0.02	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.95
Ever had sexual intercourse	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	% (adjusted) = 35.00	Adjusted mean % = 35.00	Mean difference = 0.00	HomVEE calculated = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 1.00	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Ever pregnant or made someone pregnant	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	% (adjusted) = 2.00	Adjusted mean % = 3.00	Mean difference = -1.00	HomVEE calculated = -0.25	Not statistically significant, p = 0.97	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Ever pregnant or made someone pregnant	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	% (adjusted) = 4.00	Adjusted mean % = 3.00	Mean difference = 1.00	HomVEE calculated = 0.18	Not statistically significant, p = 1.00	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Incidence of sex partners (number)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 1.16	Adjusted mean = 1.56	Mean difference = -0.40	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.90	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence of sex partners (number)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 1.10	Adjusted mean = 1.56	Mean difference = -0.46	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.48	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–cigarettes smoked per day	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 1.28	Adjusted mean = 1.30	Mean difference = -0.02	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.76	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–cigarettes smoked per day	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.91	Adjusted mean = 1.30	Mean difference = -0.39	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.49	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–days drank alcohol	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 1.81	Adjusted mean = 1.57	Mean difference = 0.24	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.97	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–days drank alcohol	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 1.87	Adjusted mean = 1.57	Mean difference = -0.30	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.96	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–days used drugs	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 2.04	Adjusted mean = 2.28	Mean difference = -0.24	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.54	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–days used drugs	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 3.55	Adjusted mean = 2.28	Mean difference = 1.27	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.49	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–times ran away (self report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.34	Adjusted mean = 0.29	Mean difference = 0.05	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.07	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Incidence–times ran away (self-report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 0.23	Adjusted mean = 0.29	Mean difference = -0.06	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.83	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the log-incidence difference.
Number of acting out problems (teacher report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 8.97	Adjusted mean = 9.61	Mean difference = -0.64	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.41
Number of acting out problems (teacher report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 9.47	Adjusted mean = 9.61	Mean difference = -0.14	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.85
Number of externalizing problems (self-report and mother report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 13.88	Adjusted mean = 13.73	Mean difference = 0.15	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.89
Number of externalizing problems (self-report and mother report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 13.65	Adjusted mean = 13.73	Mean difference = -0.08	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.95
Number of internalizing problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 11.19	Adjusted mean = 10.58	Mean difference = 0.61	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.46
Number of internalizing problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 11.66	Adjusted mean = 10.58	Mean difference = 1.08	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.19
Number of minor antisocial acts (self-report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 2.88	Adjusted mean = 2.99	Mean difference = -0.11	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.86
Number of minor antisocial acts (self-report)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 adolescents	Adjusted mean = 2.54	Adjusted mean = 2.99	Mean difference = -0.45	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.50

Olds, D. L., Holmberg, J. R., Donelan-McCall, N., Luckey, D. W., Knudtson, M. D., & Robinson, J. (2014). Effects of home visits by paraprofessionals and by nurses on children follow-up of a randomized trial at ages 6 and 9 years. JAMA Pediatrics, 168(2), 114-121.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Attention dysfunction - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	378 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.02	Unadjusted mean = 0.05	Mean difference = -0.04	Study reported = 0.34	Not statistically significant, p = 0.07	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Externalizing - 6 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver)	396 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = -0.03	Study reported = 0.76	Not statistically significant, p = 0.42	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Internalizing - 6 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver)	396 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.01	Unadjusted mean = 0.03	Mean difference = -0.02	Study reported = 0.42	Not statistically significant, p = 0.28	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Total behavioral problems - 6 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver)	396 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.04	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Mean difference = -0.04	Study reported = 0.45	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Olds, D. L., Kitzman, H., Cole, R., Robinson, J., Sidora, K., Luckey, D. W., et al. (2004). Effects of nurse home-visiting on maternal life course and child development: Age 6 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 114(6), 1550–1559

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
CBCL (externalizing problems)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	% (adjusted) = 22.00	Adjusted mean % = 24.00	OR = 0.87	HomVEE calculated = -0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.63
CBCL (externalizing problems)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	% (adjusted) = 17.40	Adjusted mean % = 20.20	OR = 0.83	HomVEE calculated = -0.11	Not statistically significant, p = 0.43
CBCL (internalizing problems)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	% (adjusted) = 20.00	Adjusted mean % = 17.00	OR = 1.30	HomVEE calculated = 0.16	Not statistically significant, p = 0.40
CBCL (internalizing problems)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	% (adjusted) = 12.60	Adjusted mean % = 14.70	OR = 0.84	HomVEE calculated = -0.11	Not statistically significant, p = 0.50
CBCL (total problems, percentage)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean % = 3.70	Adjusted mean % = 6.60	Difference = -2.90	Study reported = -0.37	Not statistically significant, p = 0.31
CBCL (total problems)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	% (adjusted) = 2.00	Adjusted mean % = 5.00	OR = 0.32	HomVEE calculated = -0.37	Statistically significant, p = 0.04	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
HTC Rating Scale (classroom social skills)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 24.93	Adjusted mean = 24.53	Mean difference = 0.40	Study reported = 0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.71
HTC Rating Scale(academic engagement)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 6.16	Adjusted mean = 6.86	Mean difference = -0.70	Study reported = -0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.72
HTC Rating Scale(academic engagement)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 4.74	Adjusted mean = 4.23	Mean difference = 0.51	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.86
HTC Rating Scale(classroom social skills)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 24.54	Adjusted mean = 22.92	Mean difference = 1.62	Study reported = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p = 0.27
KABC arithmetic achievement	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 88.61	Adjusted mean = 85.42	Mean difference = 3.19	Study reported = 0.25	Statistically significant, p = 0.04
KABC arithmetic achievement	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 89.75	Adjusted mean = 88.61	Mean difference = 1.14	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.30
KABC mental processing composite (arithmetic and reading)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 90.49	Adjusted mean = 87.64	Mean difference = 2.85	Study reported = 0.25	Statistically significant, p = 0.03
KABC mental processing composite (arithmetic and reading)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 92.34	Adjusted mean = 90.24	Mean difference = 2.10	Study reported = 0.18	Statistically significant, p = 0.03
KABC reading achievement	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 93.79	Adjusted mean = 93.56	Mean difference = 0.23	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.84
KABC reading achievement	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 92.07	Adjusted mean = 90.87	Mean difference = 1.20	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.44
MSSB (dysregulated aggression index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 98.58	Adjusted mean = 101.10	Mean difference = -2.52	Study reported = -0.25	Statistically significant, p = 0.04
MSSB (dysregulated aggression index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 99.24	Adjusted mean = 100.26	Mean difference = -1.02	Study reported = -0.10	Not statistically significant, p = 0.26
MSSB (percentage incoherent stories)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 20.90	Adjusted mean = 29.84	Mean difference = -8.94	Study reported = -0.34	Statistically significant, p < 0.01
MSSB (percentage incoherent stories)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 21.15	Adjusted mean = 25.22	Mean difference = -4.07	Study reported = -0.16	Not statistically significant, p = 0.07
MSSB (warmth/ empathy index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 100.30	Adjusted mean = 98.98	Mean difference = 1.32	Study reported = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.27
MSSB (warmth/empathy index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 100.86	Adjusted mean = 99.51	Mean difference = 1.35	Study reported = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p = 0.13
PPVT-III receptive vocabulary	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	335 children	Adjusted mean = 81.75	Adjusted mean = 79.08	Mean difference = 2.67	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.07
PPVT-III receptive vocabulary	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	615 children	Adjusted mean = 84.32	Adjusted mean = 82.13	Mean difference = 2.19	Study reported = 0.17	Statistically significant, p = 0.04
Child attended Head Start, preschool, day care, or early intervention, age 24–54 months	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	% (adjusted) = 82.00	Adjusted mean % = 75.00	OR = 1.53	HomVEE calculated = 0.26	Statistically significant, p = 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.

Olds, D. L., Kitzman, H., Hanks, C., Cole, R., Anson, E., Sidora-Arcoleo, K., et al. (2007). Effects of nurse home visiting on maternal and child functioning: Age-9 follow-up of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 120(4), e832–e845.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
GPA (reading and math, grades 1 – 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted mean = 2.68	Adjusted mean = 2.44	Mean difference = 0.24	Study reported = 0.22	Statistically significant, p = 0.02
GPA (reading and math, grades 1–3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	Adjusted mean = 2.69	Adjusted mean = 2.59	Mean difference = 0.10	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.20	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Achievement tests (reading and math, grades 1 – 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted mean = 44.89	Adjusted mean = 35.72	Mean difference = 9.17	Study reported = 0.33	Statistically significant, p < 0.01
Achievement tests (reading and math, grades 1–3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	570 children	Adjusted mean = 44.61	Adjusted mean = 41.63	Mean difference = 2.98	Study reported = 0.11	Not statistically significant, p = 0.17	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Any academic failures (grades 1–3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	= 0.07	= 0.05	Mean difference = 2.00	HomVEE calculated = 0.20	Not statistically significant, p = 0.37	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Conduct grades (grades 1 – 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted mean = 2.68	Adjusted mean = 2.65	Mean difference = 0.03	Study reported = 0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.75
Conduct grades (grades 1–3 )	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	Adjusted mean = 2.71	Adjusted mean = 2.68	Mean difference = 0.03	Study reported = 0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.67	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Count of conduct failures, (grades 1–3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	Adjusted mean = 0.06	Adjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = -0.04	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Count of depressive and anxiety disorders	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	Adjusted mean = 0.12	Adjusted mean = 0.19	Mean difference = -0.07	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.12	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculation of incidence ratio.
Count of disruptive behavior disorders (with impairment)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	Adjusted mean = 0.36	Adjusted mean = 0.31	Mean difference = -0.05	Not available	Not statistically significant, p = 0.42	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculation of incidence ratio.
Ever placed in special education (grades 1–3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	= 0.02	= 0.02	Mean difference = 0.00	HomVEE calculated = -0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.97	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Ever retained (grades 1–3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	604 children	= 0.16	= 0.12	Mean difference = 4.00	HomVEE calculated = 0.18	Not statistically significant, p = 0.25	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Teacher reported peer affiliation (grade 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	558 children	Adjusted mean = 100.35	Adjusted mean = 99.92	Mean difference = 0.43	Study reported = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.64	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Teacher-reported academically focused behavior (grade 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted mean = 99.59	Adjusted mean = 98.70	Mean difference = 0.89	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.47
Teacher-reported academically focused behavior (grade 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	558 children	Adjusted mean = 100.10	Adjusted mean = 100.08	Mean difference = 0.02	Study reported = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 0.98	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Teacher-reported antisocial behavior (grade 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	558 children	Adjusted mean = 99.77	Adjusted mean = 100.08	Mean difference = -0.31	Study reported = -0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.74	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Teacher-reported antisocial behavior (grade 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted mean = 100.18	Adjusted mean = 100.17	Mean difference = 0.01	Study reported = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 0.99
Teacher-reported peer affiliation (grade 3)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	333 children	Adjusted mean = 99.56	Adjusted mean = 99.37	Mean difference = 0.19	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.88

Olds, D. L., Robinson, J., O’Brien, R., Luckey, D. W., Pettitt, L. M., Henderson, C. R., et al. (2002). Home visiting by paraprofessionals and by nurses: A randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics, 110(3), 486.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
CBCL	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	136 children	Adjusted mean = 48.13	Adjusted mean = 49.25	Mean difference = -1.12	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID (mental development delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	136 children	= 0.10	= 0.19	OR = 0.48	HomVEE calculated = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
BSID (mental development index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	136 children	Adjusted mean = 90.18	Adjusted mean = 86.20	Mean difference = 3.98	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 The confidence interval includes 0, but according to the study, the result is statistically significant (α = 0.05).
PLS-3 (language delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	406 children	% (adjusted) = 6.00	Adjusted mean % = 12.00	OR = 0.48	HomVEE calculated = -0.45	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
PLS-3 (language delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	142 children	= 0.07	= 0.18	OR = 0.32	HomVEE calculated = -0.65	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
PLS-3 (language development)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	406 children	Adjusted mean = 101.22	Adjusted mean = 99.49	Mean difference = 1.73	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
PLS-3 (language development)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	142 children	Adjusted mean = 101.52	Adjusted mean = 96.85	Mean difference = 4.67	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
Infant low vitality: anger stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	138 children	= 0.13	= 0.32	OR = 0.33	HomVEE calculated = -0.31	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
Infant low vitality: joy stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	138 children	= 0.24	= 0.40	OR = 0.46	HomVEE calculated = -0.45	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
Infant vulnerability: fear stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	138 children	= 0.12	= 0.21	OR = 0.51	HomVEE calculated = -0.34	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
Irritable temperament	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	138 children	Adjusted mean = 2.88	Adjusted mean = 2.92	Mean difference = -0.04	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05

Olds, D. L., Robinson, J., Pettitt, L., Luckey, D. W., Holmberg, J., Ng, R. K., et al. (2004). Effects of home visits by paraprofessionals and by nurses: Age 4 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 114(6), 1560-1568.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
PLS-3 (total language score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	408 children	Adjusted mean = 92.65	Adjusted mean = 92.01	Mean difference = 0.64	Study reported = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.65	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
PLS-3 (Total language score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	144 children	Adjusted mean = 91.39	Adjusted mean = 86.73	Mean difference = 4.66	Study reported = 0.31	Statistically significant, p = 0.04
Behavioral adaptation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	144 children	Adjusted mean = 100.41	Adjusted mean = 96.66	Mean difference = 3.75	Study reported = 0.38	Statistically significant, p = 0.04
Behavioral adaptation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	408 children	Adjusted mean = 99.63	Adjusted mean = 99.71	Mean difference = -0.08	Study reported = -0.01	Not statistically significant, p = 0.93	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Child attended Head Start, preschool, center-based day care, or government-supported family care	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	= 0.54	= 0.66	OR = 0.62	HomVEE calculated = -0.29	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Emotional regulation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	408 children	Adjusted mean = 99.54	Adjusted mean = 99.61	Mean difference = -0.07	Study reported = -0.01	Not statistically significant, p = 0.95	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Emotional regulation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	144 children	Adjusted mean = 99.54	Adjusted mean = 98.42	Mean difference = 1.12	Study reported = 0.11	Not statistically significant, p = 0.51
Executive function composite	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	144 children	Adjusted mean = 100.16	Adjusted mean = 95.48	Mean difference = 4.68	Study reported = 0.47	Statistically significant, p = 0.00
Executive function composite	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	408 children	Adjusted mean = 100.64	Adjusted mean = 99.69	Mean difference = 0.95	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.34	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Externalizing behavior problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	144 children	Adjusted mean = 13.16	Adjusted mean = 12.95	Mean difference = 0.21	Study reported = 0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.88
Externalizing behavior problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	408 children	Adjusted mean = 12.16	Adjusted mean = 12.20	Mean difference = -0.04	Study reported = -0.01	Not statistically significant, p = 0.96	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.

Holmberg, John; Luckey, Dennis; Olds, David. (2011) Teacher data for the Denver Year-9 follow-up. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice.

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
ASPD Total Score - borderline/clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	328 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.04	Unadjusted mean = 0.04	OR = 1.78	HomVEE calculated = 0.37	p-value = 0.37	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
CBCL Externalizing - Dual Rater Clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	320 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.14	Unadjusted mean = 0.14	OR = 1.40	HomVEE calculated = 0.20	p-value = 0.33	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
CBCL Internalizing - Dual Rater Clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	317 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	OR = 0.95	HomVEE calculated = -0.03	p-value = 0.9	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
CBCL Total - Dual Rater Clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	317 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	OR = 0.97	HomVEE calculated = -0.01	p-value = 0.94	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Current grade placement	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	321 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 4.45	Unadjusted mean = 4.45	Mean difference = 0.12	Study reported = 0.16	p-value = 0.13
Learning support services: hrs/week	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	309 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.22	Unadjusted mean = 1.22	Mean difference = -0.42	Study reported = -0.09	p-value = 0.4	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Math Grades: Parent Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	391 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 3.11	Unadjusted mean = 3.11	Mean difference = -0.10	Study reported = -0.15	p-value = 0.16
Math Grades: School Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	305 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.51	Unadjusted mean = 2.51	Mean difference = -0.17	Study reported = -0.15	p-value = 0.15
Reading Grades: Parent Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	391 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 3.12	Unadjusted mean = 3.12	Mean difference = -0.06	Study reported = -0.07	p-value = 0.47
Reading Grades: School Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	307 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.32	Unadjusted mean = 2.32	Mean difference = -0.17	Study reported = -0.16	p-value = 0.14
Special Education school report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	308 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.16	Unadjusted mean = 0.16	OR = 1.01	HomVEE calculated = 0.01	p-value = 0.98	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Times sent to Principal"s office	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Paraprofessional vs. Control	326 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.44	Unadjusted mean = 1.44	Mean difference = 0.14	Study reported = 0.15	p-value = 0.18	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Attention dysfunction - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	394 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.03	Unadjusted mean = 0.05	Mean difference = -0.03	Study reported = 0.53	Not statistically significant, p = 0.22	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Externalizing - 6 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver)	411 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.09	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = -0.01	Study reported = 0.87	Not statistically significant, p = 0.66	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Externalizing - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	394 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.14	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = 0.04	Study reported = 1.34	Not statistically significant, p = 0.33	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Internalizing - 6 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver)	411 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.04	Unadjusted mean = 0.03	Mean difference = 0.01	Study reported = 1.35	Not statistically significant, p = 0.60	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Internalizing - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	394 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Mean difference = 0.00	Study reported = 0.96	Not statistically significant, p = 0.90	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Total behavioral problems - 6 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver)	411 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Mean difference = 0.00	Study reported = 1.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.91	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Total behavioral problems - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	394 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.09	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = 0.00	Study reported = 0.97	Not statistically significant, p = 0.94	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
CBCL	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	392 children	Adjusted mean = 45.49	Adjusted mean = 45.26	Mean difference = 0.23	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
CBCL	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 48.79	Adjusted mean = 49.25	Mean difference = -0.46	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID (mental development delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	392 children	% (adjusted) = 14.00	Adjusted mean % = 13.00	OR = 1.07	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID (Mental development delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	= 0.19	= 0.19	OR = 0.97	HomVEE calculated = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
BSID (Mental development index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 88.54	Adjusted mean = 86.20	Mean difference = 2.33	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID (Mental Developmental Index)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	392 children	Adjusted mean = 89.45	Adjusted mean = 89.38	Mean difference = 0.07	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
PLS-3 (language delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	420 children	% (adjusted) = 11.00	Adjusted mean % = 12.00	OR = 0.90	HomVEE calculated = -0.06	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
PLS-3 (language delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	406 children	% (adjusted) = 6.00	Adjusted mean % = 12.00	OR = 0.48	HomVEE calculated = -0.45	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
PLS-3 (language delay)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	= 0.13	= 0.18	OR = 0.66	HomVEE calculated = -0.23	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
PLS-3 (language development)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	406 children	Adjusted mean = 101.22	Adjusted mean = 99.49	Mean difference = 1.73	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
PLS-3 (language development)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	420 children	Adjusted mean = 99.89	Adjusted mean = 99.49	Mean difference = 0.40	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
PLS-3 (language development)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	21-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 97.83	Adjusted mean = 96.85	Mean difference = 0.98	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Infant low vitality: anger stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	158 children	= 0.22	= 0.32	OR = 0.63	HomVEE calculated = -0.31	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
Infant low vitality: joy stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	158 children	= 0.30	= 0.40	OR = 0.64	HomVEE calculated = -0.27	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
Infant vulnerability: fear stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	158 children	= 0.17	= 0.21	OR = 0.77	HomVEE calculated = -0.16	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report results are not statistically significant, although this appears to be inconsistent with the confidence interval.
Irritable temperament	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6-month follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	158 children	Adjusted mean = 2.95	Adjusted mean = 2.92	Mean difference = 0.02	Not available	HomVEE = > 0.05
Irritable temperament (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	377 children	Adjusted mean = 2.83	Adjusted mean = 2.84	Mean difference = -0.01	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Low vitality: anger stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	377 children	% (adjusted) = 26.00	Adjusted mean % = 28.00	OR = 0.89	HomVEE calculated = -0.06	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Low vitality: joy stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	377 children	% (adjusted) = 31.00	Adjusted mean % = 34.00	OR = 0.88	HomVEE calculated = -0.08	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
Vulnerable: fear stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	377 children	% (adjusted) = 18.00	Adjusted mean % = 25.00	OR = 0.67	HomVEE calculated = -0.25	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance
PLS-3 (Total language score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 90.09	Adjusted mean = 86.73	Mean difference = 3.36	Study reported = 0.23	Not statistically significant, p = 0.13
Behavioral adaptation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 99.51	Adjusted mean = 96.66	Mean difference = 2.85	Study reported = 0.28	Not statistically significant, p = 0.10
Emotional regulation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 99.29	Adjusted mean = 98.42	Mean difference = 0.87	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.59
Executive function composite	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 98.40	Adjusted mean = 95.48	Mean difference = 2.92	Study reported = 0.29	Not statistically significant, p = 0.06
Externalizing behavior problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitors and comparison (Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 12.91	Adjusted mean = 12.95	Mean difference = -0.04	Study reported = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 0.98

Findings rated moderate

Holmberg, John; Luckey, Dennis; Olds, David. (2011) Teacher data for the Denver Year-9 follow-up. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
ASPD Total Score - borderline/clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	310 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.01	Unadjusted mean = 0.02	OR = 0.62	HomVEE calculated = -0.26	p-value = 0.59	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
CBCL Externalizing - Dual Rater Clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	303 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.07	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	OR = 0.62	HomVEE calculated = -0.29	p-value = 0.26	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
CBCL Internalizing - Dual Rater Clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	302 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.04	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	OR = 0.41	HomVEE calculated = -0.53	p-value = 0.1	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
CBCL Total - Dual Rater Clinical	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	302 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.07	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	OR = 0.74	HomVEE calculated = -0.18	p-value = 0.47	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Current grade placement	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	304 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 4.35	Unadjusted mean = 4.33	Mean difference = 0.02	Study reported = 0.06	p-value = 0.57
Learning support services: hrs/week	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	294 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.53	Unadjusted mean = 1.64	Mean difference = -0.11	Study reported = -0.02	p-value = 0.83	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Math Grades: Parent Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	374 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 3.14	Unadjusted mean = 3.21	Mean difference = -0.07	Study reported = -0.11	p-value = 0.32
Math Grades: School Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	295 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.54	Unadjusted mean = 2.68	Mean difference = -0.14	Study reported = -0.12	p-value = 0.24
Reading Grades: School Report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	294 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.47	Unadjusted mean = 2.49	Mean difference = -0.02	Study reported = -0.03	p-value = 0.8
Special Education school report	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	294 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.12	Unadjusted mean = 0.16	OR = 0.76	HomVEE calculated = -0.17	p-value = 0.42	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Times sent to Principal's office	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Age 9 follow-up	Denver Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - Nurse vs. Control	308 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.32	Unadjusted mean = 1.30	Mean difference = 0.02	Study reported = 0.02	p-value = 0.85	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Any therapeutic services - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.17	Unadjusted mean = 0.36	Mean difference = -0.19	HomVEE calculated = -0.63	Statistically significant, p = 0.01	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Any therapeutic services - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	127 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.35	Unadjusted mean = 0.30	Mean difference = 0.05	HomVEE calculated = 0.15	Not statistically significant, p = 0.51	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Arithmetic achievement standard score - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 94.27	Adjusted mean = 92.66	Mean difference = 1.61	Study reported = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.44
Arithmetic achievement standard score - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	128 children	Adjusted mean = 96.72	Adjusted mean = 96.53	Mean difference = 0.19	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.93
Arithmetic achievement standard score - averaged over 6 and 9 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	128 children	Adjusted mean = 95.49	Adjusted mean = 94.60	Mean difference = 0.89	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.63
Behvioral regulation in testing - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	140 children	Adjusted mean = 99.13	Adjusted mean = 97.16	Mean difference = 1.97	Study reported = 0.23	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18
Dysregulated aggression - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 100.40	Adjusted mean = 103.26	Mean difference = -2.86	Study reported = -0.26	Not statistically significant, p = 0.12	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Externalizing - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	378 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.07	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = -0.04	Study reported = 0.64	Not statistically significant, p = 0.25	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Grade retention - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	127 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.13	Unadjusted mean = 0.09	Mean difference = 0.05	HomVEE calculated = 0.29	Not statistically significant, p = 0.38	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Intellectual functioning - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 96.58	Adjusted mean = 94.85	Mean difference = 1.73	Study reported = 0.16	Not statistically significant, p = 0.35
Internalizing - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	378 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.04	Unadjusted mean = 0.08	Mean difference = -0.05	Study reported = 0.44	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Percent incoherent stories - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 58.53	Adjusted mean = 65.63	Mean difference = -7.10	Study reported = -0.23	Not statistically significant, p = 0.17	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Reading achievement standard score - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 95.00	Adjusted mean = 93.40	Mean difference = 1.60	Study reported = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.46
Reading achievement standard score - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	128 children	Adjusted mean = 97.20	Adjusted mean = 94.60	Mean difference = 2.60	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.22
Reading achievement standard score - averaged over 6 and 9 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	128 children	Adjusted mean = 96.10	Adjusted mean = 94.00	Mean difference = 2.10	Study reported = 0.17	Not statistically significant, p = 0.27
Receptive language - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 93.31	Adjusted mean = 90.56	Mean difference = 2.75	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.16
Receptive language - averaged over 2, 4, and 6 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	141 children	Adjusted mean = 92.96	Adjusted mean = 89.01	Mean difference = 3.95	Study reported = 0.30	Statistically significant, p = 0.01
Special education/remedial services - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	127 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.19	Unadjusted mean = 0.34	Mean difference = -0.14	HomVEE calculated = -0.46	Not statistically significant, p = 0.06	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Sustained attention - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	138 children	Adjusted mean = 9.28	Adjusted mean = 8.32	Mean difference = 0.96	Study reported = 0.33	Statistically significant, p = 0.05
Sustained attention - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	126 children	Adjusted mean = 10.12	Adjusted mean = 9.17	Mean difference = 0.95	Study reported = 0.33	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08
Sustained attention - averaged over 4, 6, and 9 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	126 children	Adjusted mean = 9.83	Adjusted mean = 8.80	Mean difference = 1.03	Study reported = 0.36	Statistically significant, p = 0.01
Total behavioral problems - 9 year, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver)	378 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.07	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Mean difference = -0.02	Study reported = 0.76	Not statistically significant, p = 0.46	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Visual attention/task switching errors - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	126 children	Adjusted mean = 0.89	Adjusted mean = 1.16	Mean difference = -0.27	Study reported = -0.25	Not statistically significant, p = 0.16	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Working memory errors - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 3	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Nurse home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	123 children	Adjusted mean = 6.13	Adjusted mean = 5.47	Mean difference = 0.66	Study reported = 0.26	Not statistically significant, p = 0.15	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
CBCL (Behavior problems score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	372 children	Adjusted mean = 43.71	Adjusted mean = 45.26	Mean difference = -1.56	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID MDI	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	372 children	Adjusted mean = 90.13	Adjusted mean = 89.38	Mean difference = 0.75	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05
BSID, MDI: Mental development delay	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	24 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	372 children	Adjusted mean % = 11.00	Adjusted mean % = 13.00	OR = 0.83	HomVEE calculated = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Infant low vitality: anger stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	363 children	Adjusted mean % = 19.00	Adjusted mean % = 28.00	OR = 0.62	HomVEE calculated = -0.31	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Infant low vitality: joy stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	363 children	Adjusted mean % = 26.00	Adjusted mean % = 34.00	OR = 0.68	HomVEE calculated = -0.23	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Infant vulnerability: fear stimuli (video coding)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	363 children	% (adjusted) = 16.00	Adjusted mean % = 25.00	OR = 0.57	HomVEE calculated = -0.34	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Irritable temperament	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	363 children	Adjusted mean = 2.80	Adjusted mean = 2.84	Mean difference = -0.04	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05

Sidora-Arcoleo, K., Anson, E., Lorber, M., Cole, R., Olds, D., & Kitzman, H. (2010). Differential effects of a nurse home-visiting intervention on physically aggressive behavior in children. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 25(1), 35-45.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Child's verbal ability - age 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 years	Nurse home visiting from pregnancy to 2 years vs. control (Memphis)	721 mother/child dyads	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not available	Not statistically significant, p>0.10
Child's verbal ability - age 6	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting from pregnancy to 2 years vs. control (Memphis)	721 mother/child dyads	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	HomVEE calculated = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p = 0.10
Physical aggression - age 12	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	12 years	Nurse home visiting from pregnancy to 2 years vs. control (Memphis)	721 mother/child dyads	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not available	Not statistically significant, p>0.10
Physical aggression - age 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 years	Nurse home visiting from pregnancy to 2 years vs. control (Memphis)	721 mother/child dyads	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	HomVEE calculated = -0.21	Statistically significant, p = 0.01	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Physical aggression - age 6	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Nurse home visiting from pregnancy to 2 years vs. control (Memphis)	721 mother/child dyads	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not available	Not statistically significant, p>0.10

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Any therapeutic services - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	165 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.22	Unadjusted mean = 0.36	Mean difference = -0.13	HomVEE calculated = -0.40	Not statistically significant, p = 0.07	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Any therapeutic services - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	155 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.39	Unadjusted mean = 0.30	Mean difference = 0.09	HomVEE calculated = 0.25	Not statistically significant, p = 0.23	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Arithmetic achievement standard score - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	164 children	Adjusted mean = 93.04	Adjusted mean = 92.66	Mean difference = 0.38	Study reported = 0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.85
Arithmetic achievement standard score - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	156 children	Adjusted mean = 97.11	Adjusted mean = 96.53	Mean difference = 0.58	Study reported = 0.05	Not statistically significant, p = 0.77
Arithmetic achievement standard score - averaged over 6 and 9 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	156 children	Adjusted mean = 95.07	Adjusted mean = 94.60	Mean difference = 0.47	Study reported = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.79
Behvioral regulation in testing - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	164 children	Adjusted mean = 99.89	Adjusted mean = 97.16	Mean difference = 2.73	Study reported = 0.32	Statistically significant, p = 0.05
Dysregulated aggression - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	162 children	Adjusted mean = 99.34	Adjusted mean = 103.26	Mean difference = -3.92	Study reported = -0.36	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Grade retention - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	155 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.11	Unadjusted mean = 0.09	Mean difference = 0.02	HomVEE calculated = 0.15	Not statistically significant, p = 0.62	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Intellectual functioning - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	166 children	Adjusted mean = 96.81	Adjusted mean = 94.85	Mean difference = 1.96	Study reported = 0.18	Not statistically significant, p = 0.26
Percent incoherent stories - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	162 children	Adjusted mean = 49.94	Adjusted mean = 65.63	Mean difference = -15.69	Study reported = -0.50	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Reading achievement standard score - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	164 children	Adjusted mean = 96.16	Adjusted mean = 93.40	Mean difference = 2.76	Study reported = 0.22	Not statistically significant, p = 0.17
Reading achievement standard score - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	156 children	Adjusted mean = 97.24	Adjusted mean = 94.60	Mean difference = 2.64	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18
Reading achievement standard score - averaged over 6 and 9 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	156 children	Adjusted mean = 96.70	Adjusted mean = 94.00	Mean difference = 2.70	Study reported = 0.22	Not statistically significant, p = 0.13
Receptive language - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 92.59	Adjusted mean = 90.56	Mean difference = 2.03	Study reported = 0.16	Not statistically significant, p = 0.28
Receptive language - averaged over 2, 4, and 6 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	163 children	Adjusted mean = 90.90	Adjusted mean = 89.01	Mean difference = 1.89	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.22
Special education/remedial services - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	155 children	Unadjusted mean = 0.32	Unadjusted mean = 0.34	Mean difference = -0.01	HomVEE calculated = -0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.89	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Sustained attention - 6 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (6 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	160 children	Adjusted mean = 8.71	Adjusted mean = 8.32	Mean difference = 0.39	Study reported = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.39
Sustained attention - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	153 children	Adjusted mean = 9.25	Adjusted mean = 9.17	Mean difference = 0.08	Study reported = 0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.86
Sustained attention - averaged over 4, 6, and 9 years, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	153 children	Adjusted mean = 9.21	Adjusted mean = 8.80	Mean difference = 0.41	Study reported = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p = 0.24
Visual attention/task switching errors - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	154 children	Adjusted mean = 0.84	Adjusted mean = 1.16	Mean difference = -0.32	Study reported = -0.30	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Working memory errors - 9 year, low psych resources, treatment 1 vs. 2	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	9 years	Paraprofessional home visiting pregnancy to 2 years vs. comparison (9 year follow up, Denver); Subgroup: Mother has psychological vulnerability	150 children	Adjusted mean = 5.79	Adjusted mean = 5.47	Mean difference = 0.32	Study reported = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.46	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show findings details

Table help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
PLS-3 (total language score)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	412 children	Adjusted mean = 93.24	Adjusted mean = 92.01	Mean difference = 1.23	Study reported = 0.08	Not statistically significant, p = 0.39	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Behavioral adaptation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	412 children	Adjusted mean = 100.66	Adjusted mean = 99.71	Mean difference = 0.95	Study reported = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.34	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Child attended Head Start, preschool, center-based day care, or government-supported family care	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 children	= 0.59	= 0.66	OR = 0.76	HomVEE calculated = -0.17	Not statistically significant, p = 0.21	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Emotional regulation in testing	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	412 children	Adjusted mean = 100.86	Adjusted mean = 99.61	Mean difference = 1.25	Study reported = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p = 0.21	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Executive function composite	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	412 children	Adjusted mean = 99.70	Adjusted mean = 99.69	Mean difference = 0.01	Study reported = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 1.00	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.
Externalizing behavior problems	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	412 children	Adjusted mean = 11.65	Adjusted mean = 12.20	Mean difference = -0.55	Study reported = -0.08	Not statistically significant, p = 0.44	Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Information on sample sizes for this study was received through communication with the authors. HomVEE previously rated 24-month outcomes for nurse home visitors Moderate due to high attrition. Upon further examination, HomVEE noted that the outcomes had low attrition, and therefore they rate High.

View Revisions