Child Obesity
Conditions
Brief summary
Childhood obesity is a formidable public health issue in the United States, disproportionately affecting children from lower socioeconomic status households. Onset of obesity predicts cardiometabolic risks and other health problems in adolescence and into adulthood; thus, effective and early prevention is critical. Healthy parenting may play a pivotal role in preventing early childhood obesity. Warm, responsive, and consistent parenting is associated with the development of child self-regulation as well as healthy eating and physical activity practices, and thus may be protective against obesity risk. Targeting the parent-child relationship may be especially important when facilitating behavior change in parents who have ongoing stressors (e.g., low-income families). The proposed study aims to test an adaptation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT), an innovative parent management program that improves the parent-child relationship and enhances general parenting skills through the use of therapeutic in vivo coaching. Our adapted version, PCIT-Health, is a selective-prevention intervention that includes content specific to improving parent-child interactions and parenting in obesity-salient contexts, such as mealtime and child screen time. This project will elucidate novel approaches to, and novel targets of, early childhood obesity prevention and will provide data critical to test PCIT-Health in a large-scale randomized controlled trial. Parent-child dyads will be randomly assigned to PCIT-Health or a waitlist control in order to accomplish the following aims: AIM 1: To assess the acceptability and feasibility of the PCIT-Health delivery and assessment methods in low-income parents of overweight young children ages 3 to 6 years. AIM 2: To test the preliminary efficacy and estimate the effect size of PCIT-Health on changes in child BMI z-score (primary outcome) from baseline to (1) intervention completion and (2) 6-month post-intervention. AIM 3: To explore the effect of PCIT-Health on the following secondary outcomes: (1) parent-child relationship quality, (2) parent behavior management skills, (3) child self-regulation, (4) child eating behaviors, (5) child physical activity, and (6) child screen media use.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALPCIT-Health
PCIT-Health (also known as Parents Active in Their Children's Health; PATCH) is an adaptation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy. PCIT-Health targets (1) the parent-child relationship and (2) parenting efficacy both in general contexts (child play time and clean up time) and specifically in the context of obesity risk-related behaviors (child feeding, family mealtime, and child screen time).
Sponsors
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
University of Michigan
Central Michigan University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Behavioral observation coders are masked.
Intervention model description
Parent-child dyads will be randomly assigned to PCIT-Health or a waitlist control.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
30 Months to 84 Months
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* child BMI \> 5th percentile * child born at 37+ weeks gestation, with no significant neo- or perinatal complications.
Exclusion criteria
* Child is experiencing clinical levels of behavior problems * History of food allergies or medical problems or medications affecting appetite or weight * Non-fluency in English * Significant child or parent developmental delay * Child currently in State custody * Family currently involved with Child Protective Services * Caregiver is receiving or has plans to receive other behavioral parenting interventions
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Change in child BMI z-score will be calculated using standardized anthropometric measurement (height and weight) procedure. The z-score is a standard deviation away from the mean, based on the CDC growth charts. Higher z-scores indicate greater weight status. A Z-score of 0 equals the population mean, based on age and sex. |
| Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Percentile | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2;4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3;10 months after pre-intervention) | Change in child BMI percentile will be calculated using standardized anthropometric measurement (height and weight) procedure |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Child Screen Time | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Parent report of weekly amount of time child spends viewing/using screen media. Scores range from 0-168, with total scores reflecting sum of daily screen time across multiple types of screen media. Higher scores = more screen time. |
| Child Physical Activity | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Measured by Actigraph accelerometer to assess sedentary, moderate, moderate-to-vigorous, and vigorous physical activity (MVPA) |
| Child Sleep (Parent Report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Measured by parent report of bedtime, wake time, and naps. |
| Child Sleep (Via Actigraphy) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Measured by Actigraph accelerometer. |
| Child Problematic Media Use | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Measured by the parent-report via Problematic Media Use Measure (Domoff et al., 2019). Higher scores = greater problematic media use. Total scores = mean of items; Min = 1 to Max = 5. |
| Restrictive Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Restrictive Mediation subscale of the Parental Mediation Scale (Valkenburg et al., 1999) will be calculated via sum score of 5 items. Min = 5, max = 20, higher scores = better outcome. |
| Parent-child Relationship Quality (Observed) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System-IV (DPICS-IV) will be used. The DPICS provides a reliable measure of parent-child relationship quality (e.g., parents' child-centered skills, parent and child positive and negative physical and verbal interactions) and parent behavior management skills (e.g., use of contingent reinforcement, effective discipline, child compliance). This outcome reflects behavioral observation of parents' child-centered skills (DO skills) during child led play. This is a count variable that can range from 0 displayed skills (min) with no determined maximum. Higher numbers = more skills (better outcome). |
| Parent-child Relationship Quality (Parent Report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Parent-child Dysfunctional Interaction (PCDI) subscale of the Parenting Stress Index will be used as the parent-report of parent-child relationship quality. Values range from 12 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater dysfunction in (poorer quality of) the parent-child relationship. |
| Child Self-regulation (Parent Report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Emotion Regulation (ER) Checklist, higher scores = greater regulation (better outcome). Mean calculation for total score, with Min=1 to Max=4 |
| Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Parents will report on the location/quantity of screen media in home and child's bedroom. |
| Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Family mealtime observations will be coded for presence and use of screen media (TV, mobile device present, other media present). Coding of the observed behavior is as follows: TV on = 1 if TV is on during mealtime, TV on = 0 if TV is off during mealtime, lower values = better outcomes. Mobile device present = 1 if a mobile device is present, 0 if no mobile device is present, with lower values= better outcomes. Other media present = 1 if other screens are present, 0 if no other screens are present (lower values=better outcomes). |
| Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Family mealtime observations will be coded using a modified version of the Mealtime Interaction Coding System. Aspects of task accomplishment (TA) and behavior control BC) were coded. Scores could range from 1 (min) to 3 (max), with higher scores = better outcomes. |
| Pressure to Eat (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ)- Pressure to Eat subscale will be calculated. This subscale score is a mean, with minimum of 1 and maximum of 5 (higher scores = more pressure to eat, a worse outcome). |
| Restriction (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ)-Restriction subscale will be calculated. A mean is calculated for this subscale (min = 1 to max = 5). Higher scores = greater restriction of food (poorer outcome). |
| Emotional Feeding (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ)- Emotional Feeding subscale will be calculated with a mean of responses to items. Min = 1 to max = 5. Higher scores reflect worse outcome. |
| Instrumental Feeding (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Parental Feeding Questionnaire (PFQ)- Instrumental Feeding subscale will be calculated. Mean calculation of responses, with scores ranging from 1 (min) to 5 (max). Higher scores reflect poorer outcome. |
| Active Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Instructive Mediation subscale of the Parental Mediation Scale (Valkenburg et al., 1999) will be calculated via sum score of 5 items. Min = 5, max = 20, higher scores = better outcome. |
| Social Coviewing of Television (Parent-report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Scores on the Social Coviewing subscale of the Parental Mediation Scale (Valkenburg et al., 1999) will be calculated via sum score of 5 items. Min = 5, max = 20, higher scores = better outcome. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Child Disruptive Behaviors (Parent Report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI); intensity t-score. Higher t-scores indicate poorer outcomes (i.e., greater intensity of behavior problems). T-scores have a mean of 50 (SD = 10). T-scores of 60 or higher indicate clinical significance. |
| Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC-3); internalizing symptoms t-score (lower scores better outcome) and adaptive skills t-score (higher scores better outcome). T-scores M = 50, SD = 10, with clinical cut-offs at 70 or above. |
| Child Psychosocial Strengths (Parent Report) | Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention) | Psychosocial Strengths Inventory for Children and Adolescents (PSICA). Scores reflect total sum, ranging from 36 (min) to 252 (max); higher scores indicate better outcomes. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
After enrollment (providing consent), but before assignment, two families declined to continue participating in the study. (n = 4).
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| PCIT-Health Participants assigned to the PCIT-Health arm will receive the intervention.
PCIT-Health: PCIT-Health (also known as Parents Active in Their Children's Health; PATCH) is an adaptation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy. PCIT-Health targets (1) the parent-child relationship and (2) parenting efficacy both in general contexts (child play time and clean up time) and specifically in the context of obesity risk-related behaviors (child feeding, family mealtime, and child screen time). Due to the pandemic, telehealth PCIT-Health was provided to most of the participants. | 41 |
| Wait List Control Participants in the wait list control will receive an invitation to participate in the intervention 10 months after baseline data collection. | 18 |
| Total | 59 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | PCIT-Health | Wait List Control | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical Caregiver <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Caregiver >=65 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Caregiver Between 18 and 65 years | 27 Participants | 11 Participants | 38 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Child <=18 years | 14 Participants | 7 Participants | 21 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Child >=65 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Child Between 18 and 65 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Continuous | 53.36 months STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.06 | 50.86 months STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.95 | 52.52 months STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.56 |
| BMI percentile | 68.09 percentile STANDARD_DEVIATION 30.5 | 73.94 percentile STANDARD_DEVIATION 26.52 | 70.04 percentile STANDARD_DEVIATION 28.7 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) z-score | 0.71 Z-score STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.21 | 0.77 Z-score STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.84 | 0.73 Z-score STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.08 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Hispanic or Latino | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Not Hispanic or Latino | 26 Participants | 10 Participants | 36 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Child Hispanic or Latino | 1 Participants | 2 Participants | 3 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Child Not Hispanic or Latino | 13 Participants | 5 Participants | 18 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Child Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Asian | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Black or African American | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Caregiver White | 23 Participants | 11 Participants | 34 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child Asian | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child Black or African American | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child More than one race | 1 Participants | 2 Participants | 3 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Child White | 12 Participants | 5 Participants | 17 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 41 participants | 18 participants | 59 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Caregiver Female | 16 Participants | 8 Participants | 24 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Caregiver Male | 11 Participants | 3 Participants | 14 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Child Female | 5 Participants | 3 Participants | 8 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Child Male | 9 Participants | 4 Participants | 13 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 41 | 0 / 18 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 41 | 0 / 18 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 41 | 0 / 18 |
Outcome results
Primary
Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Percentile
Change in child BMI percentile will be calculated using standardized anthropometric measurement (height and weight) procedure
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2;4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3;10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: For Time 2, n = 11 for PCIT-health and n = 7 for control. For Time 3, n = 9 for PCIT-health and n = 6 for control.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Percentile | Change in BMI percentile (T2-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI percentile | 3.66 percentile | Standard Error 2.29 |
| PCIT-Health | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Percentile | Change in BMI percentile (T3-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI percentile | 1.12 percentile | Standard Error 2.56 |
| Wait List Control | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Percentile | Change in BMI percentile (T2-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI percentile | 1.74 percentile | Standard Error 3.24 |
| Wait List Control | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Percentile | Change in BMI percentile (T3-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI percentile | 0.88 percentile | Standard Error 3.72 |
Comparison: Difference on difference from T2 to T1 for BMI z-scorep-value: 0.73ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for BMI z-score from T3 to T1p-value: 0.98ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for BMI percentile from T2 to T1p-value: 0.63ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for BMI percentile from T3 to T1p-value: 0.96ANOVA
Primary
Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score
Change in child BMI z-score will be calculated using standardized anthropometric measurement (height and weight) procedure. The z-score is a standard deviation away from the mean, based on the CDC growth charts. Higher z-scores indicate greater weight status. A Z-score of 0 equals the population mean, based on age and sex.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: For Time 2, n = 11 for PCIT-health and n = 7 for control. For Time 3, n = 9 for PCIT-health and n = 6 for control.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score | Change in BMI z-score (T2-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI z-score | 0.11 Z-score | Standard Error 0.08 |
| PCIT-Health | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score | Change in BMI z-score (T3-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI z-score | 0.01 Z-score | Standard Error 0.1 |
| Wait List Control | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score | Change in BMI z-score (T2-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI z-score | 0.06 Z-score | Standard Error 0.12 |
| Wait List Control | Change in Child Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score | Change in BMI z-score (T3-T1); negative values indicate decrease in BMI z-score | 0.02 Z-score | Standard Error 0.15 |
Comparison: Difference on difference from T2 to T1 for BMI z-scorep-value: 0.73ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for BMI z-scores from T3 to T1.p-value: 0.98ANOVA
Secondary
Active Mediation of Television (Parent-report)
Scores on the Instructive Mediation subscale of the Parental Mediation Scale (Valkenburg et al., 1999) will be calculated via sum score of 5 items. Min = 5, max = 20, higher scores = better outcome.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Active Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in active mediation from T2 to T1 | 2.86 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.61 |
| PCIT-Health | Active Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in active mediation from T3 to T1 | 2.95 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.84 |
| Wait List Control | Active Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in active mediation from T2 to T1 | 0.64 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.86 |
| Wait List Control | Active Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in active mediation from T3 to T1 | 0.44 score on a scale | Standard Error 1.21 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for active mediation from T2 to T1p-value: 0.05ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for active mediation scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.11ANOVA
Secondary
Child Physical Activity
Measured by Actigraph accelerometer to assess sedentary, moderate, moderate-to-vigorous, and vigorous physical activity (MVPA)
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Smaller n due to incomplete data (not wearing actigraph for minimum number of days).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Physical Activity | Change in Moderate-Vigorous Physical Activity minutes from T2 to T1 (higher scores = more activity) | 38.26 minutes | Standard Error 13.78 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Physical Activity | Change in Moderate-Vigorous Physical Activity minutes from T3 to T1 (higher scores = more activity) | 32.55 minutes | Standard Error 18.4 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Physical Activity | Change in Sedentary minutes from T2 to T1 (higher scores = less activity) | -59.17 minutes | Standard Error 31.46 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Physical Activity | Change in Sedentary minutes from T3 to T1 (higher scores = less activity) | 14.59 minutes | Standard Error 40.32 |
| Wait List Control | Child Physical Activity | Change in Sedentary minutes from T3 to T1 (higher scores = less activity) | -51.65 minutes | Standard Error 52.79 |
| Wait List Control | Child Physical Activity | Change in Moderate-Vigorous Physical Activity minutes from T2 to T1 (higher scores = more activity) | 2.94 minutes | Standard Error 19.48 |
| Wait List Control | Child Physical Activity | Change in Sedentary minutes from T2 to T1 (higher scores = less activity) | 5.23 minutes | Standard Error 44.5 |
| Wait List Control | Child Physical Activity | Change in Moderate-Vigorous Physical Activity minutes from T3 to T1 (higher scores = more activity) | 16.46 minutes | Standard Error 24.09 |
Comparison: Difference on difference score for MVPA minutes from T2 to T1p-value: 0.16ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference score for MVPA minutes from T3 to T1p-value: 0.61ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference score for sedentary minutes from T2 to T1p-value: 0.26ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference score for sedentary minutes from T3 to T1p-value: 0.34ANOVA
Secondary
Child Problematic Media Use
Measured by the parent-report via Problematic Media Use Measure (Domoff et al., 2019). Higher scores = greater problematic media use. Total scores = mean of items; Min = 1 to Max = 5.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data. Higher scores indicate higher problematic media use.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Problematic Media Use | Change in problematic media use from T2 to T1 | -0.30 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.15 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Problematic Media Use | Change in problematic media use from T3 to T1 | -0.36 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
| Wait List Control | Child Problematic Media Use | Change in problematic media use from T2 to T1 | -0.38 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.21 |
| Wait List Control | Child Problematic Media Use | Change in problematic media use from T3 to T1 | -0.15 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.23 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for problematic media use from T2 to T1p-value: 0.77ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for problematic media use from T3 to T1p-value: 0.47ANOVA
Secondary
Child Screen Time
Parent report of weekly amount of time child spends viewing/using screen media. Scores range from 0-168, with total scores reflecting sum of daily screen time across multiple types of screen media. Higher scores = more screen time.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Screen Time | Change in weekly screen time from T2 to T1 | -5.72 Hours per week | Standard Deviation 12.52 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Screen Time | Change in weekly screen time from T3 to T1 | -2.92 Hours per week | Standard Deviation 12.08 |
| Wait List Control | Child Screen Time | Change in weekly screen time from T2 to T1 | 0.36 Hours per week | Standard Deviation 18.37 |
| Wait List Control | Child Screen Time | Change in weekly screen time from T3 to T1 | -8.75 Hours per week | Standard Deviation 26.62 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for child weekly screen time from T2 to T1p-value: 0.28ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for child weekly screen time from T3 to T1p-value: 0.43ANOVA
Secondary
Child Self-regulation (Parent Report)
Emotion Regulation (ER) Checklist, higher scores = greater regulation (better outcome). Mean calculation for total score, with Min=1 to Max=4
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Self-regulation (Parent Report) | Change from T2 to T1 on ER subscale | 0.23 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.31 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Self-regulation (Parent Report) | Change from T3 to T1 on ER subscale | 0.26 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.29 |
| Wait List Control | Child Self-regulation (Parent Report) | Change from T2 to T1 on ER subscale | 0.03 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.38 |
| Wait List Control | Child Self-regulation (Parent Report) | Change from T3 to T1 on ER subscale | 0.26 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.42 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for Emotion regulation subscale from T2 to T1p-value: 0.12ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for emotion regulation subscale from T3 to T1p-value: 0.96ANOVA
Secondary
Child Sleep (Parent Report)
Measured by parent report of bedtime, wake time, and naps.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Sleep (Parent Report) | Change in hours of sleep from T2 to T1 | -1.0 hours | Standard Deviation 2.25 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Sleep (Parent Report) | Change in hours of sleep from T3 to T1 | -1.05 hours | Standard Deviation 2.68 |
| Wait List Control | Child Sleep (Parent Report) | Change in hours of sleep from T2 to T1 | -0.36 hours | Standard Deviation 1.5 |
| Wait List Control | Child Sleep (Parent Report) | Change in hours of sleep from T3 to T1 | -2.44 hours | Standard Deviation 1.33 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for parent-reported sleep time from T2 to T1p-value: 0.41ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for parent-reported sleep time from T3 to T1p-value: 0.16ANOVA
Secondary
Child Sleep (Via Actigraphy)
Measured by Actigraph accelerometer.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Incomplete actigraphy data due to participants wearing actigraph for fewer than minimum required days needed to calculate sleep.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Sleep (Via Actigraphy) | Change in minutes of sleep from T2 to T1 | -10.15 hours | Standard Error 8.19 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Sleep (Via Actigraphy) | Change in minutes of sleep from T3 to T1 | -29.54 hours | Standard Error 10.1 |
| Wait List Control | Child Sleep (Via Actigraphy) | Change in minutes of sleep from T2 to T1 | 2.47 hours | Standard Error 12.38 |
| Wait List Control | Child Sleep (Via Actigraphy) | Change in minutes of sleep from T3 to T1 | 9.29 hours | Standard Error 13.22 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for actigraphy-recorded sleep time from T2 to T1p-value: 0.42ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for actigraphy-recorded sleep time from T3 to T1p-value: 0.04ANOVA
Secondary
Emotional Feeding (Parent-report)
Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ)- Emotional Feeding subscale will be calculated with a mean of responses to items. Min = 1 to max = 5. Higher scores reflect worse outcome.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Emotional Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in emotional feeding from T2 to T1 | -0.19 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
| PCIT-Health | Emotional Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in emotional feeding from T3 to T1 | -0.37 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
| Wait List Control | Emotional Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in emotional feeding from T2 to T1 | -0.16 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.19 |
| Wait List Control | Emotional Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in emotional feeding from T3 to T1 | -0.20 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.18 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for emotional feeding scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0.91ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for emotional feeding scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.45ANOVA
Secondary
Instrumental Feeding (Parent-report)
Scores on the Parental Feeding Questionnaire (PFQ)- Instrumental Feeding subscale will be calculated. Mean calculation of responses, with scores ranging from 1 (min) to 5 (max). Higher scores reflect poorer outcome.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Instrumental Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in instrumental feeding from T2 to T1 | -0.74 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
| PCIT-Health | Instrumental Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in instrumental feeding from T3 to T1 | -0.91 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
| Wait List Control | Instrumental Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in instrumental feeding from T2 to T1 | -0.27 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
| Wait List Control | Instrumental Feeding (Parent-report) | Change in instrumental feeding from T3 to T1 | -0.36 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.19 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for instrumental feeding scores from T2 to T1.p-value: 0.03ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for instrumental feeding scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.03ANOVA
Secondary
Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report)
Parents will report on the location/quantity of screen media in home and child's bedroom.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the home from T2 to T1 | 0.32 number of screens | Standard Error 0.89 |
| PCIT-Health | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the home from T3 to T1 | 0.49 number of screens | Standard Error 0.94 |
| PCIT-Health | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the child's bedroom from T2 to T1 | -0.21 number of screens | Standard Error 0.22 |
| PCIT-Health | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the child's bedroom from T3 to T1 | -0.58 number of screens | Standard Error 0.22 |
| Wait List Control | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the child's bedroom from T3 to T1 | 0.33 number of screens | Standard Error 0.32 |
| Wait List Control | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the home from T2 to T1 | 0.18 number of screens | Standard Error 1.18 |
| Wait List Control | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the child's bedroom from T2 to T1 | 0.19 number of screens | Standard Error 0.3 |
| Wait List Control | Location/Quantity of Screen Media in the Home (Parent-report) | Change in number of screens in the home from T3 to T1 | -0.39 number of screens | Standard Error 1.3 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for number of screens in the home from T2 to T1p-value: 0.91ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for number of screens in the home from T3 to T1p-value: 0.64ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for number of screens in child bedroom from T2 to T1p-value: 0.31ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for number of screens in child bedroom from T3 to T1p-value: 0.04ANOVA
Secondary
Media Parenting Practices (Observed)
Family mealtime observations will be coded for presence and use of screen media (TV, mobile device present, other media present). Coding of the observed behavior is as follows: TV on = 1 if TV is on during mealtime, TV on = 0 if TV is off during mealtime, lower values = better outcomes. Mobile device present = 1 if a mobile device is present, 0 if no mobile device is present, with lower values= better outcomes. Other media present = 1 if other screens are present, 0 if no other screens are present (lower values=better outcomes).
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Family mealtime recordings were provided by one caregiver.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in TV on during mealtime from T2 to T1 | -0.39 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| PCIT-Health | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in TV on during mealtime from T3 to T1 | -0.33 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| PCIT-Health | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in mobile device present during mealtime from T2 to T1 | -0.09 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
| PCIT-Health | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in mobile device present during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.00 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| PCIT-Health | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in other media present during mealtime from T2 to T1 | -0.17 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| PCIT-Health | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in other media present during mealtime from T3 to T1 | -0.22 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Wait List Control | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in other media present during mealtime from T2 to T1 | 0.22 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
| Wait List Control | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in TV on during mealtime from T2 to T1 | 0.11 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.18 |
| Wait List Control | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in mobile device present during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.29 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.18 |
| Wait List Control | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in TV on during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.00 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
| Wait List Control | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in other media present during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.0 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
| Wait List Control | Media Parenting Practices (Observed) | Change in mobile device present during mealtime from T2 to T1 | 0.11 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.2 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for TV on during mealtime from T2 to T1p-value: 0.03ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for TV on during mealtime from T3 to T1p-value: 0.1ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for mobile device present during mealtime from T2 to T1p-value: 0.41ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for mobile device present during mealtime from T3 to T1p-value: 0.21ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for other media present during mealtime from T2 to T1p-value: 0.02ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for other media present during mealtime from T3 to T1p-value: 0.2ANOVA
Secondary
Parent-child Relationship Quality (Observed)
Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System-IV (DPICS-IV) will be used. The DPICS provides a reliable measure of parent-child relationship quality (e.g., parents' child-centered skills, parent and child positive and negative physical and verbal interactions) and parent behavior management skills (e.g., use of contingent reinforcement, effective discipline, child compliance). This outcome reflects behavioral observation of parents' child-centered skills (DO skills) during child led play. This is a count variable that can range from 0 displayed skills (min) with no determined maximum. Higher numbers = more skills (better outcome).
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Observed) | Change in child-centered skills from T2 to T1 | 7.65 Skills | Standard Error 1.57 |
| PCIT-Health | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Observed) | Change in child-centered skills from T3 to T1 | 6.35 Skills | Standard Error 1.99 |
| Wait List Control | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Observed) | Change in child-centered skills from T2 to T1 | 0.00 Skills | Standard Error 2.12 |
| Wait List Control | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Observed) | Change in child-centered skills from T3 to T1 | -0.11 Skills | Standard Error 2.73 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for child-centered skills from T2 to T1p-value: 0.005ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for child-centered skills from T3 to T1p-value: 0.05ANOVA
Secondary
Parent-child Relationship Quality (Parent Report)
Scores on the Parent-child Dysfunctional Interaction (PCDI) subscale of the Parenting Stress Index will be used as the parent-report of parent-child relationship quality. Values range from 12 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater dysfunction in (poorer quality of) the parent-child relationship.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Parent Report) | Change in PCDI from T2 to T1 | -9.59 score on a scale | Standard Error 4 |
| PCIT-Health | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Parent Report) | Change in PCDI from T3 to T1 | -13.21 score on a scale | Standard Error 3.63 |
| Wait List Control | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Parent Report) | Change in PCDI from T2 to T1 | 7.64 score on a scale | Standard Error 5.66 |
| Wait List Control | Parent-child Relationship Quality (Parent Report) | Change in PCDI from T3 to T1 | 6.22 score on a scale | Standard Error 5.27 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for PCDI scores from T2 to T1.p-value: 0.02ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for PCDI scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.008ANOVA
Secondary
Parent Feeding Practices (Observed)
Family mealtime observations will be coded using a modified version of the Mealtime Interaction Coding System. Aspects of task accomplishment (TA) and behavior control BC) were coded. Scores could range from 1 (min) to 3 (max), with higher scores = better outcomes.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: One caregiver submitted family mealtime observations per family.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in TA score during mealtime from T2 to T1 | 0.09 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| PCIT-Health | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in TA score during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.11 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| PCIT-Health | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in BC score during mealtime from T2 to T1 | 0.13 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| PCIT-Health | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in BC score during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.11 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Wait List Control | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in BC score during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.14 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
| Wait List Control | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in TA score during mealtime from T2 to T1 | -0.33 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
| Wait List Control | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in BC score during mealtime from T2 to T1 | -0.11 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.17 |
| Wait List Control | Parent Feeding Practices (Observed) | Change in TA score during mealtime from T3 to T1 | 0.14 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for mealtime task accomplishment scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0.009ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for mealtime task accomplishment scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.84ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for mealtime behavior control scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0.24ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for mealtime behavior control scores from T3 to T1.p-value: 0.84ANOVA
Secondary
Pressure to Eat (Parent-report)
Scores on the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ)- Pressure to Eat subscale will be calculated. This subscale score is a mean, with minimum of 1 and maximum of 5 (higher scores = more pressure to eat, a worse outcome).
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Pressure to Eat (Parent-report) | Change in pressure to eat scores from T2 to T1 | -0.84 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.21 |
| PCIT-Health | Pressure to Eat (Parent-report) | Change in pressure to eat scores from T3 to T1 | -0.59 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.21 |
| Wait List Control | Pressure to Eat (Parent-report) | Change in pressure to eat scores from T2 to T1 | -0.59 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.29 |
| Wait List Control | Pressure to Eat (Parent-report) | Change in pressure to eat scores from T3 to T1 | -0.58 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.31 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for pressure to eat scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0.5ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for pressure to eat scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.98ANOVA
Secondary
Restriction (Parent-report)
Scores on the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ)-Restriction subscale will be calculated. A mean is calculated for this subscale (min = 1 to max = 5). Higher scores = greater restriction of food (poorer outcome).
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Restriction (Parent-report) | Change in Restriction scores from T2 to T1 | -0.71 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.18 |
| PCIT-Health | Restriction (Parent-report) | Change in Restriction scores from T3 to T1 | -0.88 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.2 |
| Wait List Control | Restriction (Parent-report) | Change in Restriction scores from T2 to T1 | -0.25 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.26 |
| Wait List Control | Restriction (Parent-report) | Change in Restriction scores from T3 to T1 | -0.53 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.29 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for restrictive feeding scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0.17ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for restrictive feeding scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.34ANOVA
Secondary
Restrictive Mediation of Television (Parent-report)
Scores on the Restrictive Mediation subscale of the Parental Mediation Scale (Valkenburg et al., 1999) will be calculated via sum score of 5 items. Min = 5, max = 20, higher scores = better outcome.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Restrictive Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in restrictive mediation from T2 to T1 | 2.36 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.57 |
| PCIT-Health | Restrictive Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in restrictive mediation from T3 to T1 | 1.53 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.61 |
| Wait List Control | Restrictive Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in restrictive mediation from T2 to T1 | -1.27 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.81 |
| Wait List Control | Restrictive Mediation of Television (Parent-report) | Change in restrictive mediation from T3 to T1 | 0.22 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.89 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for restrictive mediation scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0.002ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for restrictive mediation scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.24ANOVA
Secondary
Social Coviewing of Television (Parent-report)
Scores on the Social Coviewing subscale of the Parental Mediation Scale (Valkenburg et al., 1999) will be calculated via sum score of 5 items. Min = 5, max = 20, higher scores = better outcome.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Social Coviewing of Television (Parent-report) | Change in social coviewing from T2 to T1 | 1.14 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.61 |
| PCIT-Health | Social Coviewing of Television (Parent-report) | Change in social coviewing from T3 to T1 | 1.11 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.63 |
| Wait List Control | Social Coviewing of Television (Parent-report) | Change in social coviewing from T2 to T1 | 0.45 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.86 |
| Wait List Control | Social Coviewing of Television (Parent-report) | Change in social coviewing from T3 to T1 | 0.78 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.91 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for social coviewing from T2 to T1p-value: 0.53ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for social coviewing from T3 to T1p-value: 0.77ANOVA
Other Pre-specified
Child Disruptive Behaviors (Parent Report)
Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI); intensity t-score. Higher t-scores indicate poorer outcomes (i.e., greater intensity of behavior problems). T-scores have a mean of 50 (SD = 10). T-scores of 60 or higher indicate clinical significance.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Disruptive Behaviors (Parent Report) | Change in ECBI intensity t-score from T2 to T1 | -8.95 T-score | Standard Error 1.25 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Disruptive Behaviors (Parent Report) | Change in ECBI intensity t-score from T3 to T1 | -8.74 T-score | Standard Error 1.4 |
| Wait List Control | Child Disruptive Behaviors (Parent Report) | Change in ECBI intensity t-score from T2 to T1 | 0.55 T-score | Standard Error 1.77 |
| Wait List Control | Child Disruptive Behaviors (Parent Report) | Change in ECBI intensity t-score from T3 to T1 | -1.11 T-score | Standard Error 2.04 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for ECBI intensity t-scores from T2 to T1p-value: 0ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for ECBI intensity t-scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.01ANOVA
Other Pre-specified
Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report)
Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC-3); internalizing symptoms t-score (lower scores better outcome) and adaptive skills t-score (higher scores better outcome). T-scores M = 50, SD = 10, with clinical cut-offs at 70 or above.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in internalizing symptoms from T2 to T1 | -9.48 T-score | Standard Error 1.54 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in internalizing symptoms from T3 to T1 | -8.58 T-score | Standard Error 2.02 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in adaptive skills from T2 to T1 | -10.2 T-score | Standard Error 4.12 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in adaptive skills from T3 to T1 | -13.79 T-score | Standard Error 5.01 |
| Wait List Control | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in adaptive skills from T3 to T1 | -10.22 T-score | Standard Error 7.27 |
| Wait List Control | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in internalizing symptoms from T2 to T1 | -2.55 T-score | Standard Error 2.13 |
| Wait List Control | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in adaptive skills from T2 to T1 | -3.73 T-score | Standard Error 5.56 |
| Wait List Control | Child Psychological Functioning (Parent Report) | Change in internalizing symptoms from T3 to T1 | -2.00 T-score | Standard Error 2.93 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for internalizing symptoms from T2 to T1p-value: 0.02ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for internalizing symptoms from T3 to T1p-value: 0.08ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for adaptive skills from T2 to T1p-value: 0.36ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for adaptive skills from T3 to T1p-value: 0.69ANOVA
Other Pre-specified
Child Psychosocial Strengths (Parent Report)
Psychosocial Strengths Inventory for Children and Adolescents (PSICA). Scores reflect total sum, ranging from 36 (min) to 252 (max); higher scores indicate better outcomes.
Time frame: Pre-intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2; 4 months after pre-intervention), and six-month follow-up (T3; 10 months after pre-intervention)
Population: Note that the n and means/sd reflect multiple caregivers per family. Statistical analysis accounts for nested data.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCIT-Health | Child Psychosocial Strengths (Parent Report) | Change in PSICA intensity from T2 to T1 | 30.39 score on a scale | Standard Error 4.16 |
| PCIT-Health | Child Psychosocial Strengths (Parent Report) | Change in PSICA intensity from T3 to T1 | 28.12 score on a scale | Standard Error 4.33 |
| Wait List Control | Child Psychosocial Strengths (Parent Report) | Change in PSICA intensity from T2 to T1 | -5.39 score on a scale | Standard Error 5.89 |
| Wait List Control | Child Psychosocial Strengths (Parent Report) | Change in PSICA intensity from T3 to T1 | 6.35 score on a scale | Standard Error 6.29 |
Comparison: Difference on difference for PSICA intensity scores from T2 to T1 (higher scores indicate better outcomes).p-value: 0ANOVA
Comparison: Difference on difference for PSICA intensity scores from T3 to T1p-value: 0.01ANOVA