Black or African American
28%
Smith, J. D., Dishion, T. J., Shaw, D. S., Wilson, M. N., Winter, C. C., & Patterson, G. R. (2014). Coercive family process and early-onset conduct problems from age 2 to school entry. Development and Psychopathology, 26(4 Pt. 1), 917.
Model(s): Family Check-Up® For Children
Child Development and School Readiness
| Outcome Measure | Timing of Follow-Up | Rating | Direction of Effect | Effect Size (Absolute Value) | Stastical Significance | Sample Size | Sample Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Oppositional/Aggressive, Age 3, Correlation | Age 3 | Moderate | Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 | 657 children | WIC sites in Pittsburgh, PA, Eugene, OR, and Charlottesville, VA | ||
| Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Oppositional/Aggressive, Age 4, Correlation | Age 4 | Moderate | Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 | 627 children | WIC sites in Pittsburgh, PA, Eugene, OR, and Charlottesville, VA | ||
| Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Oppositional/Aggressive, Age 5, Correlation | Age 5 | Moderate | Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 | 612 children | WIC sites in Pittsburgh, PA, Eugene, OR, and Charlottesville, VA |
This study included participants from the following locations:
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Virginia
Study Participants
The study included 731 families that met two criteria. Firs, they participated in the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) when their son or daughter was between 2 years 0 months old and 2 years 11 months old. Second, they met the study’s criteria for being at risk for behavior problems—defined as one standard deviation or more above normative averages in at least two of three domains: (1) child behavior problems (for example, conduct problems or high-conflict relationships with adults); (2) primary caregiver problems (for example, maternal depression, daily parenting challenges, self-report of substance or mental health diagnosis, or status as a teen parent at first birth); and (3) socioeconomic status (a caregiver with low educational achievement or low family income based on WIC criteria). Screening was conducted in 2002 and 2003. Of the 731 primary caregivers who agreed to participate, 50 percent were European American, 28 percent were African American, 13 percent were biracial, and 9 percent were from another racial group. Thirteen percent were Hispanic. More than two-thirds of the randomized sample had an annual income below $20,000. Forty-one percent of the sample had a high school diploma or GED and 24 percent had less than a high school diploma or GED. The 731 children in the study were 29.9 months old on average at the time of the age 2 assessments. Forty-nine percent of the children were female and 58 percent lived in two-parent households.
Setting
Families were recruited from WIC program sites in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (37 percent of sample); Eugene, Oregon (37 percent of sample); and Charlottesville, Virginia (26 percent of sample).
Intervention condition
Note: Navigate to the model page for more information about the home visiting model. See the source manuscript for more information about how the model was implemented in this study.
Comparison Conditions
Families assigned in the comparison group received the Family Check-Up intervention's comprehensive assessment but did not receive any other interventions or services.
Funding Sources
This research was supported by National Institute on Drug Abuse grant DA016110, awarded to Thomas Dishion, Daniel Shaw, and Melvin Wilson. Justin Smith received support from research training grant T32 MH20012 from the National Institute of Mental Health, awarded to Elizabeth Stormshak.
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
| Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Confounding factors? | Valid, reliable measures? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Randomized controlled trial | Low |
Not established on race/ethnicity, SES, or baseline measures of the outcomes. |
None |
Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed under Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1 |
Notes from the review of this manuscript
In addition to the reported outcomes that rated moderate, several outcomes in this study rated low: child noncompliance at ages 3, 4, and 5; dyadic coercion at ages 3, 4, and 5; and three outcomes analyzed from ages 2 to 5 with an intent-to-treat approach: oppositional/aggressive behavior, child noncompliance, and dyadic coercion. These outcomes rated low because we could not assess attrition or baseline equivalence based on information reported in the study, nor was it available from the author. HomVEE reports results for interventions delivered to families with children from birth to kindergarten entry. Given that the FCU intervention continued to be delivered to families at the time of later assessment, child and parent outcomes reported within this study that were assessed after children were age 5 were excluded from review. This study is part of a large RCT described by Dishion et al. (2008).