Manuscript Details

McConnell, M. A., Rokicki, S., Ayers, S., Allouch, F., Perreault, N., Gourevitch, R. A., Martin, M. W., Zhou, R., A., Zera, C., Hacker, M. R., Chien, A., Bates, M. A., & Baicker, K. (2022). Effect of an intensive nurse home visiting program on adverse birth outcomes in a Medicaid-eligible population: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 328(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.9703

Peer Reviewed

High rating
Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Confounding factors? Valid, reliable measures?
Randomized controlled trial Low

Not assessed for randomized controlled trials with low attrition

No

Yes

Notes from the review of this manuscript

Information on sample sizes and adjusted means for the study’s findings is based on correspondence with the authors.

Child Health
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Adverse birth outcome composite Child's birth High
0.02 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4966 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Extremely preterm birth Child's birth High
0.00 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4932 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Large for gestational age Child's birth High
0.11 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4932 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Mean birth weight (in grams) Child's birth High
0.01 Not statistically significant, p = 0.67 4932 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Mean gestational age (in weeks) Child's birth High
0.04 Not statistically significant, p = 0.15 4932 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Neonatal morbidity Child's birth High
0.09 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4932 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Overnight NICU stay Child's birth High
0.06 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4543 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Very low birth weight Child's birth High
0.17 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4932 children NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Maternal Health
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Cesarean delivery Child's birth High
0.06 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 4932 mothers NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Severe maternal morbidity Child's birth High
0.13 Not statistically significant, p= ≥0.05 5158 mothers NFP vs. usual care RCT, South Carolina 2016-2021, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant

This study included participants with the following characteristics at enrollment:

Race/Ethnicity

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if Hispanic ethnicity was reported separately or respondents could select two or more race or ethnicity categories.

Black or African American
52%
Hispanic or Latino
5%
White
33%
Some other race
1%
Two or more races
3%
Unknown
6%

Maternal Education

Less than a high school diploma
22%
High school diploma or GED
35%
Some college or Associate's degree
35%
Bachelor's degree or higher
8%
Unknown
<1%

Other Characteristics

Enrollment in means-tested programs
65%

This study included participants from the following locations:

  • South Carolina
Study Participants

Participants could refer themselves to the program or be referred through clinicians, schools, or Medicaid. Eligible participants had to be pregnant (< 28 weeks’ gestation) with no previous live births, income-eligible for Medicaid during pregnancy, and residing in a program-served county in South Carolina. Participants were ineligible if they were age 14 or younger or were incarcerated or in a lockdown facility. They were randomized to either the Nurse-Family Partnership intervention (3,806 participants) or the comparison condition (1,864 participants). Four thousand nine hundred and sixty-six mothers were included in the analyses in this manuscript (3,319 in the intervention group and 1,647 in the comparison group). Participants were in the study from the time of enrollment at pregnancy until the child was 24 months old. Outcomes presented in this manuscript were measured at the child’s birth. In the study, 55 percent of the participants were Black and 35 percent were White, and at enrollment, 82 percent were age 19 or older. Thirty-five percent had a high school diploma or equivalent, whereas 42 percent had some college, a college degree, or postgraduate training.

Setting

The study took place in South Carolina.

Intervention condition
Comparison Conditions

Participants assigned to the comparison condition were not eligible to receive home visits through Nurse-Family Partnership. They received usual care, including access to all other community and medical services. They were provided with a list of available community resources.

Subgroups examined

• Mother has vulnerability (yes or no) • Race/ethnicity (Black or non-Black)

Author Affiliation

The study authors are affiliated with Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Harvard Medical School, RAND Corporation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston Children's Hospital, State of California Office of Cradle-to-Career Data, National Bureau of Economic Research, and University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. HomVEE is not aware of any relationship between the authors and the home visiting model developer or distributor.

Funding Sources

This research was supported by the Children’s Trust of South Carolina, Arnold Ventures, The Duke Endowment, BlueCross BlueShield Foundation of South Carolina, and the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab North America Health Care Delivery Initiative.