SafeCare®

Model effectiveness research report last updated: 2018

Effects shown in research

Positive parenting practices

Findings rated high

SafeCare: Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training Module
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Keys to Interactive Parenting Scale (KIPS)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training vs. Control 229 mothers Adjusted mean = 3.83 Adjusted mean = 3.54 Mean difference = 0.30 Study reported = 0.46 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01
Keys to Interactive Parenting Scale (KIPS)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Posttest Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training vs. Control 229 mothers Adjusted mean = 3.99 Adjusted mean = 3.48 Mean difference = 0.51 Study reported = 0.78 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01
Positive Behavior Support (Planned Activities Training Checklist)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training vs. Control 229 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.47 Adjusted mean = 0.38 Mean difference = 0.09 Study reported = 0.56 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01
Positive Behavior Support (Planned Activities Training Checklist)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Posttest Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training vs. Control 229 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.55 Adjusted mean = 0.37 Mean difference = 0.18 Study reported = 1.13 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01
SafeCare: Planned Activities Training Module
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Keys to Interactive Parenting Scale (KIPS)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Planned Activities Training vs. Control 258 mothers Adjusted mean = 3.82 Adjusted mean = 3.54 Mean difference = 0.22 Study reported = 0.34 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
Keys to Interactive Parenting Scale (KIPS)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Posttest Planned Activities Training vs. Control 258 mothers Adjusted mean = 3.97 Adjusted mean = 3.48 Mean difference = 0.40 Study reported = 0.62 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01
Positive Behavior Support (Planned Activities Training Checklist)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Planned Activities Training vs. Control 258 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.45 Adjusted mean = 0.38 Mean difference = 0.07 Study reported = 0.44 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
Positive Behavior Support (Planned Activities Training Checklist)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Posttest Planned Activities Training vs. Control 258 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.51 Adjusted mean = 0.37 Mean difference = 0.13 Study reported = 0.81 Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01
SafeCare: Planned Activities Training Module
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
PCI (Planned Activities Training) skills: Positive Behavior Support (PCI skills checklist), PCI (Planned Activities Training) vs. Control, 12 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
12 months PCI (Planned Activities Training) vs. Control 258 mother/child dyads Not applicable Not applicable Not reported Study reported = 0.37 Statistically significant, p = 0.01

footnote300

Submitted by user on

Authors used linear regression models to estimate the impact, and reported a coefficient, standard error, effect size, and p-value.

Parenting: Keys to Interactive Parenting Scale (KIPS), PCI (Planned Activities Training) vs. Control, 12 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
12 months PCI (Planned Activities Training) vs. Control 258 mother/child dyads Not applicable Not applicable Not reported Study reported = 0.58 Statistically significant, p < 0.001

footnote300

Submitted by user on

Authors used linear regression models to estimate the impact, and reported a coefficient, standard error, effect size, and p-value.

Findings rated moderate

SafeCare/Project 12-Ways: Home Safety Module
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Total Number of Hazardous Items
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
2-3 weeks Project 12-Ways 3 families Not applicable Not applicable Not reported Not applicable Not applicable
Australian Adaptation of UCLA Parent-Child Health and Wellness Project
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Going to the doctor
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 2.85 Mean = 1.75 Mean difference = 1.10 HomVEE calculated = 0.92 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Going to the doctor
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 2.85 Mean = 2.20 Mean difference = 0.65 HomVEE calculated = 0.59 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Going to the doctor
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 2.85 Mean = 2.00 Mean difference = 0.85 HomVEE calculated = 0.78 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Health comprehension
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 5.10 Mean = 4.91 Mean difference = 0.19 HomVEE calculated = 0.16 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Health comprehension
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 5.10 Mean = 5.50 Mean difference = -0.40 HomVEE calculated = -0.36 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Health comprehension
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 5.10 Mean = 5.80 Mean difference = -0.70 HomVEE calculated = -0.71 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Illustrations—Dangers
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 76.25 Mean = 57.33 Mean difference = 18.92 HomVEE calculated = 1.50 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Illustrations—Dangers
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 76.25 Mean = 54.82 Mean difference = 21.43 HomVEE calculated = 1.65 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Illustrations—Dangers
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 76.25 Mean = 55.70 Mean difference = 20.55 HomVEE calculated = 2.02 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Illustrations—Precautions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 78.85 Mean = 45.33 Mean difference = 33.52 HomVEE calculated = 1.92 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Illustrations—Precautions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 78.85 Mean = 47.10 Mean difference = 31.75 HomVEE calculated = 1.91 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Illustrations—Precautions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 78.85 Mean = 48.91 Mean difference = 29.94 HomVEE calculated = 1.75 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Precautions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 60.35 Mean = 45.67 Mean difference = 14.68 HomVEE calculated = 0.67 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Precautions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 60.35 Mean = 53.30 Mean difference = 7.05 HomVEE calculated = 0.35 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Home Precautions
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 60.35 Mean = 48.73 Mean difference = 11.62 HomVEE calculated = 0.60 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Illness and symptom recognition
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 12.95 Mean = 9.36 Mean difference = 3.59 HomVEE calculated = 1.09 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Illness and symptom recognition
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 12.95 Mean = 10.50 Mean difference = 2.45 HomVEE calculated = 0.69 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Illness and symptom recognition
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 12.95 Mean = 10.80 Mean difference = 2.15 HomVEE calculated = 0.62 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Life threatening emergencies
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 4.95 Mean = 3.00 Mean difference = 1.95 HomVEE calculated = 0.98 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Life threatening emergencies
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 4.95 Mean = 1.91 Mean difference = 3.04 HomVEE calculated = 1.79 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Life threatening emergencies
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 4.95 Mean = 3.25 Mean difference = 1.70 HomVEE calculated = 0.88 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Using medicine safely
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 2 31 families Mean = 2.15 Mean = 1.27 Mean difference = 0.88 HomVEE calculated = 0.97 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Using medicine safely
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 4 24 families Mean = 2.15 Mean = 1.75 Mean difference = 0.40 HomVEE calculated = 0.46 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

Using medicine safely
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Assessment 2 Group 1 vs. Group 3 30 families Mean = 2.15 Mean = 1.00 Mean difference = 1.15 HomVEE calculated = 1.30 Not available

footnote89

Submitted by user on

Author-reported statistics are derived from models controlling for baseline outcomes as required for a moderate rating. However, author-reported statistics cannot be reported separately for the comparisons of interest. Because of this lack of sufficient information, this outcome has been categorized as no effect.

SafeCare: Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training Module
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
PCI (Planned Activities Training) skills: Positive Behavior Support (PCI skills checklist), PCI-C (Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training) vs. Control, 12 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
12 months PCI-C (Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training) vs. Control 229 mother/child dyads Not applicable Not applicable Not reported Study reported = 0.68 Statistically significant, p < 0.001

footnote300

Submitted by user on

Authors used linear regression models to estimate the impact, and reported a coefficient, standard error, effect size, and p-value.

Parenting: Keys to Interactive Parenting Scale (KIPS), PCI-C (Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training) vs. Control, 12 months
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
12 months PCI-C (Cellular Phone Enhanced Planned Activities Training) vs. Control 229 mother/child dyads Not applicable Not applicable Not reported Study reported = 0.35 Statistically significant, p = 0.00

footnote300

Submitted by user on

Authors used linear regression models to estimate the impact, and reported a coefficient, standard error, effect size, and p-value.

View Revisions