Table 7.
PVR vs. IPCI |
HAC vs. IPCI |
PVR vs HAC |
|||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficient | p | 95% CI | Coefficient | p | 95% CI | Coefficient | p | 95% CI | |
Parent age (years) | -0.04 | 0.07 | -0.08, 0.00 | -0.04 | 0.02 | -0.08, 0.00 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Child age (months) | -0.01 | 0.32 | -0.04, 0.01 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | -0.02 | <0.01 | -0.04, -0.01 |
Child gender (female) | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | -0.47 | 0.02 | -0.85, -0.09 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Single parent | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Household unemployment | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
No higher education | 0.53 | 0.01 | 0.12, 0.93 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Income | |||||||||
Low vs. mid | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Low vs. high | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
SEIFA/100 (less disadvantage) | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
LOTE | 1.23 | <0.001 | 0.66, 1.79 | 1.09 | <0.001 | 0.56, 1.62 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Difficult child temperament | -0.43 | 0.11 | -0.96, 0.10 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | -0.10 | 0.59 | -0.46, 0.26 |
Low parenting self-efficacy | 0.17 | 0.16 | -0.07, 0.40 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Poor health-related quality of life | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
Greater psychological distress | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
R2= 0.18 | R2= 0.14 | R2= 0.05 |
∗Excluded due to p > 0.1 at univariate level; LOTE, Language other than English. PVR = Parental Verbal Responsivity scale; IPCI = Indicator of Parent–Child Interactions, positive caregiver score; HAC = Home Activities with Child scale.