Dataset Information

How evidence-based is an 'evidence-based parenting program'? A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis of Triple P.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Interventions to promote positive parenting are often reported to offer good outcomes for children but they can consume substantial resources and they require rigorous appraisal. METHODS: Evaluations of the Triple P parenting program were subjected to systematic review and meta-analysis with analysis of biases. PsychInfo, Embase and Ovid Medline were used as data sources. We selected published articles reporting any child-based outcome in which any variant of Triple P was evaluated in relation to a comparison condition. Unpublished data, papers in languages other than English and some book chapters were not examined. Studies reporting Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory or Child Behavior Checklist scores as outcomes were used in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 33 eligible studies was identified, most involving media-recruited families. Thirty-one of these 33 studies compared Triple P interventions with waiting list or no-treatment comparison groups. Most papers only reported maternal assessments of child behavior. Twenty-three papers were incorporated in the meta-analysis. No studies involved children younger than two-years old and comparisons of intervention and control groups beyond the duration of the intervention were only possible in five studies. For maternally-reported outcomes the summary effect size was 0.61 (95%CI 0.42, 0.79). Paternally-reported outcomes following Triple P intervention were smaller and did not differ significantly from the control condition (effect size 0.42 (95%CI -0.02, 0.87)). The two studies involving an active control group showed no between-group differences. There was limited evidence of publication bias, but there was substantial selective reporting bias, and preferential reporting of positive results in article abstracts. Thirty-two of the 33 eligible studies were authored by Triple-P affiliated personnel. No trials were registered and only two papers contained conflict of interest statements. CONCLUSIONS: In volunteer populations over the short term, mothers generally report that Triple P group interventions are better than no intervention, but there is concern about these results given the high risk of bias, poor reporting and potential conflicts of interest. We found no convincing evidence that Triple P interventions work across the whole population or that any benefits are long-term. Given the substantial cost implications, commissioners should apply to parenting programs the standards used in assessing pharmaceutical interventions. See related commentary: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/145.

SUBMITTER: Wilson P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3532197 | biostudies-other | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How evidence-based is an 'evidence-based parenting program'? A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis of Triple P.

Wilson Philip P Rush Robert R Hussey Susan S Puckering Christine C Sim Fiona F Allely Clare S CS Doku Paul P McConnachie Alex A Gillberg Christopher C

BMC medicine 20121102

<h4>Background</h4>Interventions to promote positive parenting are often reported to offer good outcomes for children but they can consume substantial resources and they require rigorous appraisal.<h4>Methods</h4>Evaluations of the Triple P parenting program were subjected to systematic review and meta-analysis with analysis of biases. PsychInfo, Embase and Ovid Medline were used as data sources. We selected published articles reporting any child-based outcome in which any variant of Triple P wa ...[more]

PMID: 23121760

Similar Datasets

Project description:FT program (FT) is a multimodal approach used to enhance postoperative rehabilitation and accelerate recovery. It was 1st described in open heart surgery, then modified and applied successfully in colorectal surgery. FT program was described in liver resection for the 1st time in 2008. Although the program has become widely accepted, it has not yet been considered the standard of care in liver surgery.we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of using the FT program compared to the traditional care (TC), on the main clinical and surgical outcomes for patients who underwent elective liver resection.PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Cochran databases were searched to identify eligible articles that compared FT with TC in elective liver resection to be included in this study. Subgroup meta-analysis between laparoscopic and open surgical approaches to liver resection was also conducted. Quality assessment was performed for all the included studies. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) were considered as a summary measure of evaluating the association in this meta-analysis for dichotomous and continuous data, respectively. A 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported for both measures. I was used to assess the heterogeneity across studies.From 2008 to 2015, 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 cohort studies were identified, including 394 and 416 patients in the FT and TC groups, respectively. The length of hospital stay (LoS) was markedly shortened in both the open and laparoscopic approaches within the FT program (P?<?0.00001). The reduced LoS was accompanied by accelerated functional recovery (P = 0.0008) and decreased hospital costs, with no increase in readmission, morbidity, or mortality rates. Moreover, significant results were found within the FT group such as reduced operative time (P = 0.03), lower intensive care unit admission rate (P?<?0.00001), early bowel opening (P???0.00001), and rapid normal diet restoration (P???0.00001).FT program is safe, feasible, and can be applied successfully in liver resection. Future RCTs on controversial issues such as multimodal analgesia and adherence rate are needed. Specific FT guidelines should be developed for liver resection.

Project description:Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways are multimodal, evidence-based approaches to optimize patient outcome after surgery. However, the use of ERAS protocols to improve morbidity and recovery time without compromising safety following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains to be elucidated.We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of ERAS protocols compared with conventional perioperative care (CPC) in patients following PD.PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library were searched between January 2000 and June 2015.The patients who underwent PD with ERAS protocols or CPC were eligible. The studies that compared postoperative length of hospital stay (PLOS), postoperative complications, or in-hospital costs in the 2 groups were included.A meta-analysis, meta-regression, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed to estimate the postoperative outcomes between the 2 groups and identified the potential confounders. We used the methodological index for nonrandomized studies checklist to assess methodological qualities. Weighted mean differences (WMD) or odds ratios (OR) were calculated with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The publication bias tests were also performed through the funnel plots.In total, 14 nonrandomized comparative studies with 1409 ERAS cases and 1310 controls were analyzed. Implementation of an ERAS protocol significantly reduced PLOS (WMD: -4.17 days; 95%CI: -5.72 to -2.61), delayed gastric emptying (OR: 0.56; 95%CI: 0.44-0.71), overall morbidity (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.54-0.74), and in-hospital costs compared to CPC (all P?<?0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in other postoperative outcomes. Age, gender, and ERAS component implementation did not significantly contribute to heterogeneity for PLOS as shown by meta-regression analysis.Our study suggested that ERAS was as safe as CPC and improved recovery of patients undergoing PD, thus reducing in-hospital costs. General adoption of ERAS protocols during PD should be recommended.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the meditation-based intervention on obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).MethodsThe following databases were searched up to April 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Medline (via PubMed), PsycARTICLES, 4 Korean databases (Korean Medical Database [KMbase], Koreanstudies Information Service System [KISS], National Digital Science Library [NDSL], and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System [OASIS]), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). The search terms related to meditation-based intervention and OCD were used. This systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The selected articles were evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 was used to perform the meta-analysis.ResultsIn all, 16 randomized controlled trials were selected. The meta-analysis showed that the group receiving the treatment combining medication and meditation-based intervention for OCD showed a more significant post-treatment improvement in Yale-Brown obsessive compulsive scale than the group receiving medication only. Compared with other non-medication interventions that are known to be effective in treating OCD, the Yale-Brown obsessive compulsive scale showed a significant improvement immediately after the meditation-based intervention. However, no significant difference was found in the follow-up monitoring data across all examined cases.ConclusionThis study was conducted to verify the effects of meditation-based intervention on OCD. The results suggested that combined treatment with medication and meditation-based intervention was more effective in treating OCD than medication alone; the positive effects of meditation-based intervention may be greater than the effects of other non-medication interventions. However, the lack of significant difference in the follow-up indicates that long-term effect of meditation-based interventions is unclear.Trial registration numberPROSPERO CRD42021244408.

Project description:Parkinson's disease (PD) is the second-most-common chronic and progressive neurodegenerative disease. The long-term use of levodopa leads to a loss of efficacy and to complications. Therefore, many patients with PD have turned to complementary therapies to help relieve their symptoms. Acupuncture is most commonly used as a complementary therapy in patients with PD. This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of acupuncture for patients with PD. This study was performed to summarize and evaluate evidence regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture in the relief of PD symptoms.Seven databases, namely, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], and three Korean medical databases, were searched from their inception through August 2015 without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they contained reports of acupuncture compared with no treatment and conventional treatment alone or acupuncture plus conventional treatment compared with conventional treatment alone for PD symptoms. Assessments were performed with the unified PD rating scales (UPDRS) I, II, III, and IV and the total score, the Webster scale, and effectiveness rating. Methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale and the Cochrane risk of bias (ROB).In all, 982 potentially relevant articles were identified; 25 RCTs met our inclusion criterion, 19 of 25 RCTs were high-quality studies (i.e., a score of 6 or higher). The included RCTs showed favorable results for acupuncture plus conventional treatment compared with conventional treatment alone in the UPDRS II, III, and IV and the total score. Acupuncture was effective in relieving PD symptoms compared with no treatment and conventional treatment alone, and acupuncture plus conventional treatment had a more significant effect than conventional treatment alone.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the use of acupuncture for relief of PD symptoms and found that acupuncture has significant positive effects. Acupuncture can be considered as a combination treatment with conventional treatment for patients with PD. Further studies on this topic should be carried out according to rigorous methodological designs in both the East and the West.

Project description:Child physical abuse is an issue of global concern. Conservative estimates set global prevalence of this type of maltreatment at 25%, its consequences and cost to society escalating with increasing frequency and severity of episodes. Syntheses of the evidence on parenting programs for reducing rates of physical abuse recidivism have, to date, not been able to establish effectiveness. Paucity of data and inconsistent inclusion criteria in past reviews made meta-analysis often impossible or uninformative. The current systematic review updates prior reviews and overcomes some of the methodological issues they encountered by pooling trial-level data from a well-defined scope of trials of parenting interventions aimed at preventing the re-abuse of children by parents with substantiated or suspected physical abuse history. Randomized controlled trials and rigorous non-randomized designs were sought via nine online databases, two trial registries, several clearinghouses and contact with experts. A total of fourteen studies of variable quality were included in this review, four of which had outcomes that enabled meta-analysis. Overall, this review presents evidence supporting the effectiveness of parenting behavioral programs based on social learning theory for reducing hard markers of child physical abuse recidivism. Meta-analysis found that the absolute risk reduction in risk of recidivism was 11 percentage points less for maltreating parents who undergo parenting programs (RD = -0.11, 95% CI [-0.22, -0.004], p = 0.043, I 2 = 28.9%). However, the pooled effect size was not statistically significant when calculated as a risk ratio (0.76, 95% CI [0.54, 1.07], I 2 = 38.4%). Policy makers and practitioners should be made aware that this intervention method is backed by promising evidence featuring modest yet significant reductions in hard markers of child physical abuse, even though the methodological robustness of these findings should be further explored in future research.

Dataset Information

How evidence-based is an 'evidence-based parenting program'? A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis of Triple P.

Publications

How evidence-based is an 'evidence-based parenting program'? A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis of Triple P.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets