Search

Background: We investigated the effectiveness of Nurse‐Family Partnership (NFP), a prenatal‐to‐age‐two‐years home‐visiting programme, in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Methods: For this randomised controlled trial, we recruited participants from 26 public health settings who were: <25 years, nulliparous, <28 weeks gestation and experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. We randomly allocated participants (one‐to‐one; computer‐generated) to intervention (NFP plus existing services) or comparison (existing services) groups. Prespecified outcomes were prenatal substance exposure (reported previously); child injuries (primary), language, cognition and mental health (problem behaviour) by age two years; and subsequent pregnancies by 24 months postpartum. Research interviewers were masked. We used intention‐to‐treat analyses. (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01672060.) Results: From 2013 to 2016 we enrolled 739 participants (368 NFP, 371 comparison) who had 737 children. Counts for child injury healthcare encounters [rate per 1,000 person‐years or RPY] were similar for NFP (223 [RPY 316.17]) and comparison (223 [RPY 305.43]; rate difference 10.74, 95% CI ‐46.96, 68.44; rate ratio 1.03, 95% CI 0.78, 1.38). Maternal‐reported language scores (mean, M [SD]) were statistically significantly higher for NFP (313.46 [195.96]) than comparison (282.77 [188.15]; mean difference [MD] 31.33, 95% CI 0.96, 61.71). Maternal‐reported problem‐behaviour scores (M [SD]) were statistically significantly lower for NFP (52.18 [9.19]) than comparison (54.42 [9.02]; MD ‐2.19, 95% CI −3.62, −0.75). Subsequent pregnancy counts were similar (NFP 115 [RPY 230.69] and comparison 117 [RPY 227.29]; rate difference 3.40, 95% CI ‐55.54, 62.34; hazard ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.79, 1.29). We observed no unanticipated adverse events. Conclusions: NFP did not reduce child injuries or subsequent maternal pregnancies but did improve maternal‐reported child language and mental health (problem behaviour) at age two years. Follow‐up of long‐term outcomes is warranted given that further benefits may emerge across childhood and adolescence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A better understanding of factors contributing to the observed variability in estimates of test–retest reliability in published studies on standardized diagnostic interviews (SDI) is needed. The objectives of this systematic review and meta‐analysis were to estimate the pooled test–retest reliability for parent and youth assessments of seven common disorders, and to examine sources of between‐study heterogeneity in reliability. Methods: Following a systematic review of the literature, multilevel random effects meta‐analyses were used to analyse 202 reliability estimates (Cohen's kappa = ҡ) from 31 eligible studies and 5,369 assessments of 3,344 children and youth. Results: Pooled reliability was moderate at ҡ = .58 (CI 95% 0.53–0.63) and between‐study heterogeneity was substantial (Q = 2,063 (df = 201), p < .001 and I2 = 79%). In subgroup analysis, reliability varied across informants for specific types of psychiatric disorder (ҡ = .53–.69 for parent vs. ҡ = .39–.68 for youth) with estimates significantly higher for parents on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder and the broad groupings of externalizing and any disorder. Reliability was also significantly higher in studies with indicators of poor or fair study methodology quality (sample size <50, retest interval <7 days). Conclusions: Our findings raise important questions about the meaningfulness of published evidence on the test–retest reliability of SDIs and the usefulness of these tools in both clinical and research contexts. Potential remedies include the introduction of standardized study and reporting requirements for reliability studies, and exploration of other approaches to assessing and classifying child and adolescent psychiatric disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]