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, see HomVEE's Methods and Standards Resources.

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

Setting in which research was conducted

Search By

Displaying 1531 - 1540 of 2633, sorted alphabetically Export list of citations

McAuley, C., Knapp, M., Beecham, J., McCurry, N., & Sleed, M. (2004). Young families under stress: Outcomes and costs of Home-Start support. Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Model(s) Reviewed: Home-Start

View Manuscript
Low rating
This manuscript received a low rating because it is a non-experimental comparison group design study that does not satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2.1

McCann, D. C., Thompson, M., Daley, D., Barton, J., Laver-Bradbury, C., Hutchings, J., Coghill, D., Stanton, L., Maishman, T., Dixon, L., Caddy, J., Chorozoglou, M., Raftery, J., & Sonuga-Barke, E. (2014). Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of a specialist and a generic parenting programme for the treatment of preschool ADHD. Trials, 15(1), 1–41. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-142

Model(s) Reviewed: New Forest Parenting Programme (NFPP)

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
Ineligible study design

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2.1

McCarthy, M., Noonan, M., & Gamse, B. (1998). Exploring differences in year-round and traditional calendar Even Start projects. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.

Model(s) Reviewed: Even Start-Home Visiting (Birth to Age 5)

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
Study does not examine a relevant target population

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1

McCartney, K., & Scarr, S. (1989). Far from the point: A reply to Levenstein. Child Development, 60(2), 517–518.

Model(s) Reviewed: ParentChild+® Family Home Visiting Model

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
This citation is not a primary study

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1

McCartney, K., Scarr, S., Goldfarb, A., & Hrncir, E. (1983). The screening, assessment and treatment of language delay in young children: An evaluation plan. First Language, 4(10, Pt 1), 63-65.

Model(s) Reviewed: ParentChild+® Family Home Visiting Model

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
This citation is not a primary study

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1

McClarey, M. (Mar 2012). Review: 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), 139–141.

Model(s) Reviewed: Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
This citation is not a primary study

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1

McCombs-Thornton, K., Wang, Y., & Sturmfels, N. (2023). Parents as Teachers Family Outcomes: New Insights from the Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE). Parents as Teachers National Center. https://parentsasteachers.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/PAT-Family-Out…

Model(s) Reviewed: Parents as Teachers (PAT)®

View Manuscript
Moderate rating
This manuscript received a rating of moderate because it is a non-experimental comparison group design study that satisfies the baseline equivalence requirement.

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2.3

McConnell, D., Breitkreuz, R., & Savage, A. (2012). Independent evaluation of the Triple P Positive Parenting Program in family support service settings. Child & Family Social Work, 17(1), 43-54.

Model(s) Reviewed: Triple P - Positive Parenting Program®—Variants suitable for home visiting

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
Home visiting is not a substantial element of the program

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1

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

Model(s) Reviewed: Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®

View Manuscript
High rating
This manuscript received a rating of high because it is a randomized-controlled trial with low-attrition.

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2.2

McConnell, M. A., Zhou, R. A., Martin, M. W., Gourevitch, R. A., Steenland, M., Bates, M. A., Zera, C., Hacker, M., Chien, A., & Baicker, K. (2020). Protocol for a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of the Nurse-Family Partnership's home visiting program in South Carolina on maternal and child health outcomes. Trials, 21, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04916-9

Model(s) Reviewed: Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®

View Manuscript
Does not pass screens
Not about a primary study

Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2.2
Download XLSX