Childhood Asthma Prevention Study (CAPS)

Model effectiveness research report last updated: 2012

In brief

Evidence of model effectiveness

This model does not meet the criteria established by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for an “evidence-based early childhood home visiting service delivery model” for the general population or for tribal populations because the findings from high- or moderate-rated effectiveness studies of the model do not meet all required criteria.

View Revisions

Model description

The Childhood Asthma Prevention Study (CAPS) was designed to reduce children’s wheezing-related morbidity by reducing household allergens and increasing caregiver illness-management skills. CAPS participants were low-income families living in the Denver metropolitan area with children between 9 and 24 months old who had experienced at least three wheezing episodes. Nurses trained as home visitors addressed allergen and tobacco smoke reduction, as well as psychosocial factors of illness management, including parental knowledge, parent-child relationships, and caregiver mental health. Home visitors guided and supported caregivers’ efforts to achieve health-promotion goals through education, problem solving, and referrals for additional services. CAPS consisted of 18 home visits delivered over the course of a year. For more information, please read the Model Overview.

View Revisions

Extent of evidence

Results of search and review
Number of manuscripts
At least one finding was eligible for review…
2
  …and at least one finding rated high
2
  …and at least one finding rated moderate (but none rated high)
0
  …and all findings that were eligible for review rated low
0
  …but manuscript is additional source2
0

For more information, see the research database. For more information on the criteria used to rate research, please see details of HomVEE’s methods and standards.

View Revisions

Summary of findings

View Revisions

Criteria established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Information based on comprehensive review of all high- and moderate-rated manuscripts
CriterionCriterion descriptionCriterion met?
1High- or moderate-quality impact study?Yes
2Across high- or moderate-quality studies, favorable impacts in at least two outcome domains within one sample OR the same domain for at least two non-overlapping samples?No
3Favorable impacts on full sample?Yes
4Any favorable impacts on outcome measures sustained at least 12 months after model enrollment?
Reported for all research but only required for RCTs.
Yes
5One or more favorable, statistically significant impact reported in a peer-reviewed journal?
Reported for all research but only required for RCTs.
Yes
View Revisions