Research Manuscript Database

Search for a study manuscript by keyword or select any filter to see results. For more information about how HomVEE reviews studies, read about our Systematic Review Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards.

Filter By

Model

Manuscript Rating

Outcome domains examined

States in which the research was conducted

Manuscripts with subgroup findings

Populations served

Child age at the time of enrollment

Delivery Method

Intervention delivered in non-English language

Search By

Displaying 781 - 790 of 2489
Forsythe, P. (1992). Homebuilders and family preservation. Children and Youth Services Review, 14(1-2), 37-47.

Model(s) Reviewed: HOMEBUILDERS (Birth to Age 5)®

Does not pass screens
Fraser, M. W., Pecora, P. J., Popuang, C., & Haapala, D. A. (1992). Event history analysis: A proportional hazards perspective on modeling outcomes in intensive family preservation services. Journal of Social Service Research, 16(1-2), 123-158.

Model(s) Reviewed: HOMEBUILDERS (Birth to Age 5)®

Does not pass screens
Floyd, R. M., & Taylor, J. (1991). Keeping families together: The homebuilders model. Community Alternatives, 3(2), 145-147.

Model(s) Reviewed: HOMEBUILDERS (Birth to Age 5)®

Does not pass screens
Spaid, W. M., & Fraser, M. (1991). The correlates of Success/Failure in brief and intensive family treatment: Implications for family preservation services. Children and Youth Services Review, 13(1-2), 77-99.

Model(s) Reviewed: HOMEBUILDERS (Birth to Age 5)®

Does not pass screens
Whittaker, J. K., Tracy, E. M., Kinney, J., & Booth, C.  (1990). Reaching high-risk families: Intensive family preservation in human services. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.

Model(s) Reviewed: HOMEBUILDERS (Birth to Age 5)®

Does not pass screens

Kemp, L., Harris, E., McMahon, C., Matthey, S., Vimpani, G., Anderson, T., Schmied, V., & Aslam, H. (2013). Benefits of psychosocial intervention and continuity of care by child and family health nurses in the pre‐and postnatal period: Process evaluation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(8), 1850–1861.

Model(s) Reviewed: Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home-Visiting Program (MECSH)

Moderate rating
Kemp, L., Eisbacher, L., McIntyre, L., O’Sullivan, K., Taylor, J., Clark, T., et al. (2006). Working in partnership in the antenatal period: What do child and family health nurses do? Contemporary Nurse, 23(2), 312-320.

Model(s) Reviewed: Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home-Visiting Program (MECSH)

Not applicable (NA) - implementation study

Kemp, L., & Harris, E. (2012). The challenges of establishing and researching a sustained nurse home visiting programme within the universal child and family health service system. Journal of Research in Nursing, 17(2), 127–138.

Model(s) Reviewed: Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home-Visiting Program (MECSH)

Does not pass screens
Cowley, S., Kemp, L., Day, C., & Appleton, J. (Mar 2012). Research and the organisation of complex provision: Conceptualising health visiting services and early years programmes. Journal of Research in Nursing, 17(2), 108–124.

Model(s) Reviewed: Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home-Visiting Program (MECSH)

Does not pass screens
Kemp, L., Harris, E., McMahon, C., Matthey, S., Vimpani, G., Anderson, T., Schmied, V., Aslam, H., & Zapart, S. (2011). Child and family outcomes of a long-term nurse home visitation programme: A randomised controlled trial. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 96, 533-540.

Model(s) Reviewed: Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home-Visiting Program (MECSH)

Moderate rating