Resources

This paper is focused on attrition and the HomVEE attrition standard in particular. The paper begins by defining attrition and explaining why the bias that attrition introduces into randomized controlled trials can be problematic when interpreting research results. HomVEE uses an attrition standard adapted from the Department of Education’s What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), another systematic evidence review. HomVEE’s population of interest includes pregnant women, and families with children age birth to kindergarten entry; the population is different than the school-age children whose test scores were the basis of the attrition standard for the WWC. This paper describes findings testing the sensitivity of the assumptions underlying the HomVEE standard using data about parents and young children. Note: This publication displays the attrition boundary from the HomVEE Version 1 Handbook. Please consult the latest handbook for the current HomVEE attrition boundary.

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) offers a highly credible way to evaluate the effect of a program. But a strong design can be offset by weaknesses in planning or execution. One common problem that weakens the conclusions of RCTs is attrition, or missing data. This brief describes what attrition is, why it matters, and how it factors into the study ratings in the HomVEE review. Note: This publication displays the attrition boundary from the HomVEE Version 1 Handbook. Please consult the latest handbook for the current HomVEE attrition boundary.

This report describes key lessons learned from the first year of the HomVEE review about the current state of evidence on the effectiveness of early childhood home visiting, gaps in the research literature that create challenges for assessing effectiveness, and suggestions for strengthening future research in this area.