Divorce
Conditions
Keywords
divorce, intervention, positive child outcomes
Brief summary
This study is a two-armed randomized controlled trial of the eNew Beginnings Program (eNBP)'s effects on children's mental health problems as well as interparental conflict, parent-child relationship quality and effective discipline. The eNBP is an asynchronous, fully web-based program that was based on the in-person, group NBP, which has been found to strengthen parent-child relationship quality and effective discipline and reduce children's mental health problems in three randomized controlled trials of the NBP involving over 1,800 children. The investigators hypothesized that parents in the eNBP intervention condition would have less interparental conflict and higher parent-child relationship quality and effective discipline than those in the wait-list control condition. The investigators also expected the children whose parents were in the eNBP intervention condition would have fewer internalizing problems and externalizing problems and higher prosocial skills than those with parents in the wait-list control.
Detailed description
This study is a two-armed intervention randomized controlled trial of the eNew Beginnings Program (eNBP)'s effects on children's mental health problems as well as interparental conflict, parent-child relationship quality and effective discipline. The eNBP is an asynchronous, fully web-based program that was based on the in-person, group-based NBP. Three randomized controlled trials of the NBP involving over 1,800 children found positive effects to strengthen parent-child relationship quality and effective discipline and reduce children's mental health problems. The eNBP teaches all the skills in the 10-session NBP. The investigators hypothesized that parents in the eNBP would have less interparental conflict and higher parent-child relationship quality and effective discipline than those in the wait-list control condition following the intervention. The investigators also expected the children whose parents were in the eNBP would have fewer internalizing problems and externalizing problems and higher prosocial skills than those with parents in the wait-list control following the intervention. Parents and their offspring were recruited using Qualtrics, a leading-edge sample acquisition technology that partners with 20 online panel providers and recruits nationally. Initial sampling criteria were parent was divorced, separated but never married, divorcing, or separating; had one or more children aged 6 to 18; and spoke English. Parents who met these criteria were sent an email with information about the study and a web-based survey that assessed contact with child/ren, access to a computer with high-speed internet or a smart phone and demographics. Interested parents were provided additional information about the study and screened for eligibility by phone. To be eligible, parents had to be divorced, separated but never married, divorcing or separating; have one or more child between 6 and 18; be English speaking; spend at least three hours/week or at least one overnight every other week with their child(ren); and have access to a computer with high-speed internet or a smart phone. The sample consisted of 131 parents randomized to eNBP (N = 81) or wait-list condition (N = 50) and 102 of their adolescent offspring. Primary outcome measures were measures of interparental conflict, parent-child relationship quality, effective discipline and children's internalizing and externalizing problems and prosocial behavior.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALOnline New Beginnings Program (eNBP)
The eNBP is a five-hour, asynchronous, fully web-based adaptation of the group-based NBP that can be used on a smart phone, tablet or computer. Separate versions for fathers and mothers consist of the same didactic content and interactive exercises, with gender appropriate references, testimonials and video skills demonstrations.
Sponsors
Family Transitions: Programs that Work
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)
Masking description
Investigators were not aware of whether the participants were assigned to eNBP or the wait-list control condition.
Intervention model description
Participants were randomized to receive an online parenting program for divorced and separated parents (N=81) or a wait list control condition (N=50)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Parents divorced, divorcing or separated * Parents separated but never married * One or more children aged 6 to 18 * Parents spoke English * Parents spend at least 3 hours a week with children or have one overnight every other week with their children * Parents have access to a computer with high speed internet access of a smart phone
Exclusion criteria
\* Parents who do not meet all of the inclusion criteria
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Brief Problem Monitor -- Internalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 6-item scale assessing child internalizing problems as reported by parents. Item scores range from 0-2, a sum score across the items was computed and converted to a T-score using the algorithm purchased from ASEBA (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment). The range of the T-scores is: 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). Score of 50 = the fiftieth percentile of the normative sample. (Achenbach & Rescola, 2001). T-scores of 65 and above are considered sufficiently elevated to be of concern. The values shown are the T-score values for the sample. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.. |
| Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 7-item scale assessing child externalizing problems as reported by parents. The sum score of the items (range 0-2 for each item) for each individual is converted to T-score, using the algorithm purchased from ASEBA (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment). The range of the T-scores is: 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). High score is worse outcome. |
| Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | 7-item scale assessing child externalizing problems as reported by children. Item scores range from 0-2, a sum score across the items was computed and converted to a T-score using the algorithm purchased from ASEBA (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment). The range of the T-scores is: 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). Score of 50 = the fiftieth percentile of the normative sample. (Achenbach & Rescola, 2001). T-scores of 65 and above are considered sufficiently elevated to be of concern. The values shown are the T-score values for the sample. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome. |
| Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Children Report Version | 1 month | 15-item scale assessing frequency and intensity of interparental conflict as reported by children. Minimum score = 1; Maximum score = 3. High score is worse outcome |
| Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | One month | 15-item scale assessing frequency and intensity of interparental conflict as reported by parents. Minimum score = 1; Maximum score = 3. High score is worse outcome |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 16-item scales to assess parental acceptance completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | 16-item scales to assess parental acceptance completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 16-item scales to assess parental rejection completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is worse outcome. |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | 16-item scales to assess parental rejection completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is worse outcome. |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 8-item scales to assess parental consistency of discipline completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | 8-item scales to assess parental consistency of discipline completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 11-item scales to assess parental follow-through of discipline completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | 7-item scales to assess parental follow-through of discipline completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 9-item scales to assess parental monitoring of child behaviors with friends and at school completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | 9-item scales to assess parental monitoring of child behaviors with friends and at school completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Parent Adolescent Communication Scale (Barnes & Olson, 1985) -- Parent Report | 1 month | 10-item scale to assess parent-child communication completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome. |
| Caught in the Middle Scale (Buchanan et al., 1991) -- Child Report | 1 month | 7-item scales to assess children being caught in the middle between parents completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 4. High score is worse outcome. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Child Report Version | 1 month | Each of the 5 items is scored 0-2 (range 0-10). The score reported is the mean of the total scores. A higher score is a better outcome. |
| Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Parent Report Version | 1 month | 5-item scale assessing child prosocial skills as reported by parents. Each of the 5 items is scored 0-2. The score reported is the mean item score. A high score is a better outcome. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
Parents were recruited using Qualtrics, a leading-edge sample acquisition technology. To be eligible, parents had to be divorced, separated but never married, divorcing or separating, have one or more child between six and eighteen, speak English, spend at least three hours a week or at least one overnight every other week with their child(ren), and have access to a computer or a smart phone. Recruitment and assessment period was from Feb. 15, 2020 through August 31, 2021.
Pre-assignment details
Participants were randomly assigned to groups after completing an online pre-test assessment.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| eNBP The sample consisted of 81 parents who reported on 81 children who were randomly assigned and 59 children in these families who provided self report dates. | 140 |
| eNBP The sample consisted of 81 parents who reported on 81 children who were randomly assigned and 59 children in these families who provided self report dates. | 140 |
| Wait List Controls 50 parents who reported on 50 children in randomly assigned families and 43 children who self-reported in these families. | 93 |
| Wait List Controls 50 parents who reported on 50 children in randomly assigned families and 43 children who self-reported in these families. | 93 |
| Total | 466 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | eNBP | Wait List Controls | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous Age of Parent Participant | 40.47 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.89 | 40.65 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.62 | 40.54 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.75 |
| Age, Continuous | 11.56 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.8 | 13.67 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.36 | 12.35 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.77 |
| Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Child Report | 57.74 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.72 | 56.33 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.8 | 55.23 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.21 |
| Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report | 54.17 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.69 | 54.74 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.77 | 54.39 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.1 |
| Brief Problem Monitor -- Internalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report | 57.27 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.39 | 57.91 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.2 | 57.50 T-score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.67 |
| Caught in the Middle Scale (Buchanan et al., 1991) -- Child Report | 1.78 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.69 | 1.89 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.69 | 1.82 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.69 |
| Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Child Report | 4.11 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.71 | 4.12 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.76 | 4.11 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.73 |
| Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Parent Report | 4.44 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.58 | 4.37 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.69 | 4.41 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.63 |
| Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Children Report Versio | 1.55 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.42 | 1.63 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.09 | 1.58 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.47 |
| Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | 1.41 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.41 | 1.44 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.47 | 1.42 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.43 |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory--Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965)--Child Report | 4.27 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.65 | 4.17 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.65 | 4.23 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.65 |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory--Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965)--Parent Report | 4.58 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.37 | 4.42 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.55 | 4.52 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.45 |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory-Consistent Discipline (Shaefer, 1965) --Child Report | 4.31 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.73 | 4.17 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.92 | 4.25 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.81 |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory-Consistent Discipline (Shaefer, 1965) --Parent Report | 4.63 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.56 | 4.45 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.61 | 4.56 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.58 |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory--Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965)--Child Report | 1.61 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.48 | 1.71 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.61 | 1.65 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.54 |
| Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory--Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965)--Parent Report | 1.44 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.4 | 1.63 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.56 | 1.52 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.48 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 6 Participants | 4 Participants | 10 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 73 Participants | 46 Participants | 119 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Child Report | 3.80 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.7 | 3.74 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.66 | 3.77 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.68 |
| Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Parent Report | 3.79 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.66 | 3.77 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.64 | 3.78 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.65 |
| Parent Adolescent Communication Scale (Barnes & Olson, 1985) -- Parent Report | 4.42 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.56 | 4.40 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.53 | 4.41 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.54 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 12 Participants | 5 Participants | 17 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 1 Participants | 2 Participants | 3 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 64 Participants | 42 Participants | 106 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Gender of Child Participants Female | 36 Participants | 26 Participants | 62 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Gender of Child Participants Male | 45 Participants | 24 Participants | 69 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Gender of Parent Participants Female | 50 Participants | 33 Participants | 83 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Gender of Parent Participants Male | 31 Participants | 17 Participants | 48 Participants |
| Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Child Report | 8.88 Mean item score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.31 | 8.33 Mean item score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.79 | 8.65 Mean item score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.55 |
| Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Parent Report | 1.65 Mean item score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.39 | 1.62 Mean item score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.41 | 1.64 Mean item score on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.4 |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 140 | 0 / 93 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 140 | 0 / 93 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 140 | 0 / 93 |
Outcome results
Primary
Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Child Report Version
7-item scale assessing child externalizing problems as reported by children. Item scores range from 0-2, a sum score across the items was computed and converted to a T-score using the algorithm purchased from ASEBA (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment). The range of the T-scores is: 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). Score of 50 = the fiftieth percentile of the normative sample. (Achenbach & Rescola, 2001). T-scores of 65 and above are considered sufficiently elevated to be of concern. The values shown are the T-score values for the sample. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Child Report Version | 52.61 T-score on a scale | Standard Error 0.66 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Child Report Version | 53.68 T-score on a scale | Standard Error 0.92 |
p-value: 0.33ANCOVA
Primary
Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version
7-item scale assessing child externalizing problems as reported by parents. The sum score of the items (range 0-2 for each item) for each individual is converted to T-score, using the algorithm purchased from ASEBA (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment). The range of the T-scores is: 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). High score is worse outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version | 54.72 T-score on a scale | Standard Error 1.32 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Brief Problem Monitor -- Externalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version | 55.58 T-score on a scale | Standard Error 1.58 |
p-value: 0.29ANCOVA
Primary
Brief Problem Monitor -- Internalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version
6-item scale assessing child internalizing problems as reported by parents. Item scores range from 0-2, a sum score across the items was computed and converted to a T-score using the algorithm purchased from ASEBA (Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment). The range of the T-scores is: 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). Score of 50 = the fiftieth percentile of the normative sample. (Achenbach & Rescola, 2001). T-scores of 65 and above are considered sufficiently elevated to be of concern. The values shown are the T-score values for the sample. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome..
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Brief Problem Monitor -- Internalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version | 56.80 T-score on a scale | Standard Error 1.68 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Brief Problem Monitor -- Internalizing Subscale (Achenbach et al., 2011) -- Parent Report Version | 59.72 T-score on a scale | Standard Error 2 |
p-value: 0.005ANCOVA
Primary
Caught in the Middle Scale (Buchanan et al., 1991) -- Child Report
7-item scales to assess children being caught in the middle between parents completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 4. High score is worse outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Caught in the Middle Scale (Buchanan et al., 1991) -- Child Report | 1.49 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Caught in the Middle Scale (Buchanan et al., 1991) -- Child Report | 1.55 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
p-value: 0.63ANCOVA
Primary
Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Child Report Version
9-item scales to assess parental monitoring of child behaviors with friends and at school completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Child Report Version | 4.45 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Child Report Version | 4.23 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
p-value: 0.12ANCOVA
Primary
Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version
9-item scales to assess parental monitoring of child behaviors with friends and at school completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | 4.71 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.17 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Child Monitoring Scale (Hetherington et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | 4.62 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.2 |
p-value: 0.43ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Children Report Version
15-item scale assessing frequency and intensity of interparental conflict as reported by children. Minimum score = 1; Maximum score = 3. High score is worse outcome
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Children Report Version | 1.30 Score on the scale | Standard Error 0.04 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Children Report Version | 1.47 Score on the scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
p-value: 0.02ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version
15-item scale assessing frequency and intensity of interparental conflict as reported by parents. Minimum score = 1; Maximum score = 3. High score is worse outcome
Time frame: One month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | 1.15 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (Grych et al., 1992) -- Parent Report Version | 1.26 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
p-value: 0.05ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version
16-item scales to assess parental acceptance completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 4.45 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 4.29 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
p-value: 0.17ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version
16-item scales to assess parental acceptance completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 4.67 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Acceptance Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 4.54 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
p-value: 0.07ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version
8-item scales to assess parental consistency of discipline completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 4.46 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 4.07 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
p-value: 0.04ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version
8-item scales to assess parental consistency of discipline completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 4.27 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Consistency Discipline Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 4.05 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.17 |
p-value: 0.01ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version
16-item scales to assess parental rejection completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is worse outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 1.40 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.05 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Child Report Version | 1.62 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
p-value: 0.03ANCOVA
Primary
Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version
16-item scales to assess parental rejection completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is worse outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 1.41 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Children's Report of Parent Behavior Inventory -- Rejection Subscale (Shaefer, 1965) -- Parent Report Version | 1.63 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
p-value: 0.002ANCOVA
Primary
Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Child Report Version
7-item scales to assess parental follow-through of discipline completed by children. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Child Report Version | 4.17 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Child Report Version | 3.77 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
p-value: 0.002ANCOVA
Primary
Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Parent Report Version
11-item scales to assess parental follow-through of discipline completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Parent Report Version | 3.77 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Oregon Discipline Scale - Follow-Through (Oregon Social Learning Center, 1991) -- Parent Report Version | 3.55 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.19 |
p-value: 0.02ANCOVA
Primary
Parent Adolescent Communication Scale (Barnes & Olson, 1985) -- Parent Report
10-item scale to assess parent-child communication completed by parents. Minimum score = 1. Maximum score = 5. High score is better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Parent Adolescent Communication Scale (Barnes & Olson, 1985) -- Parent Report | 4.53 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Parent Adolescent Communication Scale (Barnes & Olson, 1985) -- Parent Report | 4.36 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
p-value: 0.03ANCOVA
Secondary
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Child Report Version
Each of the 5 items is scored 0-2 (range 0-10). The score reported is the mean of the total scores. A higher score is a better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
Population: Only children between ages 10 and 18 who were interested and whose parents gave permission completed the assessments (N=102).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Child Report Version | 8.90 Sum score on a scale | Standard Error 0.2 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Child Report Version | 8.89 Sum score on a scale | Standard Error 0.24 |
p-value: 0.97ANCOVA
Secondary
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Parent Report Version
5-item scale assessing child prosocial skills as reported by parents. Each of the 5 items is scored 0-2. The score reported is the mean item score. A high score is a better outcome.
Time frame: 1 month
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Online New Beginnings Program (eNBP) | Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Parent Report Version | 1.65 Sum score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Wait-list Control Condition | Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire -- Prosocial Subscale (Goodman, 2001) -- Parent Report Version | 1.59 Sum score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
p-value: 0.42ANCOVA