PFL Evaluation Team at the UCD Geary Institute. (2013). Preparing For Life: Early childhood intervention. Assessing the impact of Preparing For Life at eighteen months. Dublin, Ireland: UCD Geary Institute.
| Screening decision | Screening conclusion | HomVEE procedures and standards version |
|---|---|---|
| Passes screens | Eligible for review | Version 2 |
| Rating | Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Compromised randomization | Confounding factors | Valid, reliable measure(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Randomized controlled trial | Low | Not assessed for randomized controlled trials with low attrition |
No | No |
Yes |
Several findings not reported in the tables below received a low rating because they had high attrition and did not satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement or did not satisfy the reliability requirement. Findings about mothers’ civic engagement, partnership status, household size, the presence of grandparents, and whether the mother knows the baby’s weight are ineligible for review because they do not fall in one of HomVEE’s eligible outcome domains. Measures of the fathers’ income and education are ineligible for review because HomVEE does not review measures of family self-sufficiency for the father, unless the manuscript clearly indicates that the father resides in the household.
| Study participants | Study participants were pregnant women recruited in a maternity hospital or in the community. A total of 233 pregnant women were randomly assigned to either the Preparing for Life—Home Visiting group that received home visiting services (“high PFL”; 115 participants) or the comparison condition that did not receive home visiting services (“low PFL”; 118 participants). A total of 154 participants were included in the study, 74 in the high PFL group and 80 in the low PFL comparison group. Outcomes were measured when the children in the sample were 18 months old. At intake, the average age of the mothers was 25. The percentage of mothers identifying as Irish was 96 percent, and 4 percent identified as Irish Traveller. About half of the women were first-time mothers. |
|---|---|
| Setting | The study took place in North Dublin, Ireland. |
| Intervention services | Preparing for Life—Home Visiting provided home visits that lasted 30 minutes to two hours during the mother’s pregnancy and until the child started school at age 5. The majority of participants received visits every two weeks, though some participants received services monthly. The home visitor was a trained Preparing for Life mentor. The mentor provided information by using tip sheets and worked with participants to resolve issues around the child’s development, including the child’s prebirth development, nutrition, rest and routine, and cognitive and social development. The mentor also addressed the mother and her supports. Participants had access to baby massage sessions until the child was 10 months old. Participants also received packages of materials, including home safety items (corner guards, angle latches, heat-sensitive spoons, and baby gym/play mats) and toys (puzzles, activity toys, and bricks), worth about 100 Euros per package. |
| Comparison conditions | Participants in the low PFL (comparison) group did not have access to the home visiting services or tip sheets. The comparison group did, however, receive some of the same resources made available to the high PFL (intervention) group, including the package of safety items and toys. These participants had access to an information officer who met with participants before the child’s birth and at various intervals after birth and provided information on Preparing for Life community events and other local services. Participants in the comparison group had access to public health workshops, such as a stress-control program and a healthy food program. |
| Subgroups examined |
This field lists subgroups examined in the manuscript (even if they were not replicated in other samples and not reported on the summary page for this model’s report). • Maternal substance use/disorder (smoked or drank during pregnancy) • Relationship status (mother currently has a partner) • Pregnancy status (currently pregnant or not currently pregnant) • Maternal childcare use (uses out-of-home care) • Maternal employment (currently working) |
| Funding sources | The Atlantic Philanthropies and the Department of Children and Youth Affairs (Ireland) supported the research. |
| Author affiliation | Dr. Doyle and the Preparing for Life Evaluation team are affiliated with the University College Dublin Geary Institute for Public Policy. The authors were contracted by the home visiting model developers to evaluate Preparing for Life—Home Visiting. |
| Peer reviewed | No |
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: None found. SocialScienceRegistry.org Identifier: None found. Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies Identifier: None found. Study registration was assessed by HomVEE for Clinicaltrials.gov beginning with the 2014 review, and for other registries beginning with the 2021 review.
| Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories: Words and Gestures (CDI-WG), Vocabulary Words Produced |
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
High PFL vs. Low PFL; Dublin, Ireland 2008-2010; full sample |
18 months old |
126 children | Unadjusted mean = 54.34 | Unadjusted mean = 54.38 | Mean difference = -0.04 | Study reported = 0.00 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.99 |
HomVEE calculated significanceStatistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations. Authors' reported effect size is Cohen's d |
| High | MacArthur-Bates Communicative Developmental Inventories: Words and Gestures (CDI-WG), Vocabulary Words Understood |
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
High PFL vs. Low PFL; Dublin, Ireland 2008-2010; full sample |
18 months old |
126 children | Unadjusted mean = 63.95 | Unadjusted mean = 68.94 | Mean difference = -4.99 | Study reported = -0.17 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.34 |
HomVEE calculated significanceStatistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations. Authors' reported effect size is Cohen's d |
| Rating | Outcome measure | Effect | Sample | Timing of follow-up | Sample size | Intervention group | Comparison group | Group difference | Effect size | Statistical significance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Equivalised weekly household income |
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect |
High PFL vs. Low PFL; Dublin, Ireland 2008-2010; full sample |
18 months old |
139 families | Unadjusted mean = 239.68 | Unadjusted mean = 234.51 | Mean difference = 5.17 | Study reported = 0.05 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.78 |
HomVEE calculated significanceStatistical significance is based on HomVEE calculations. Authors' reported effect size is Cohen's d |
