Table 5.
Parent–child relationship outcomes as reported across studies included in the systematic review
| Study | Measure | Assessment | Child age (months) | Intervention | Control | Cohen’s d | Other statistics | ||||
| n | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | ||||||
| Ammaniti et al 56 | Sensitivity (M) SMIIS | V | 12 | 45 | 7.25 | 1.06 | 37 | 6.67 | 1.31 | 0.49 (0.05; 0.93) | |
| Cooperation (D) SMIIS | V | 12 | 45 | 8.11 | 0.94 | 37 | 7.67 | 1.19 | 0.42 (−0.02; 0.85) | ||
| Interference (M) SMIIS* | V | 12 | 45 | 1.36 | 0.81 | 37 | 1.52 | 0.80 | 0.20 (−0.24; 0.63) | ||
| Affective state (M) SMIIS* | V | 12 | 45 | 1.15 | 0.44 | 37 | 1.39 | 0.66 | 0.44 (−0.00; 0.88) | ||
| Self-regulative behaviours (C) SMIIS | V | 12 | 45 | 1.92 | 0.95 | 37 | 1.96 | 0.99 | −0.04 (−0.48; 0.39) | ||
| Baggett et al 43 | Positive behaviours (C) Landry | V | ~10 | 20 | 20 | 0.69 (0.05; 1.33) | Eta2=0.107 | ||||
| Positive behaviours (P) Landry | V | ~10 | 20 | 20 | 0.45 (−0.17; 1.08) | Eta2=0.049 | |||||
| Barlow et al 59 | Sensitivity (M) CARE-index | V | 12 | 62 | 9.27 | 2.67 | 59 | 8.2 | 3.26 | 0.36 (0.00; 0.72) | |
| Cooperativeness (C) CARE-index | V | 12 | 62 | 9.35 | 3.08 | 59 | 7.92 | 3.7 | 0.42 (0.06; 0.78) | ||
| Bridgeman et al 47 | Positive Language (M) (in-house) | V | 36 | 42 | 30.26 | 27.07 | 31 | 7.24 | 39.93 | 0.70 (0.22; 1.17) | |
| Sensitivity (M) Ainsworth’s Rating Scale | V | 36 | 42 | 6.29 | 1.62 | 31 | 5.19 | 2.30 | 0.57 (0.09; 1.04) | ||
| Acceptance (M) Ainsworth’s Rating Scale | V | 36 | 42 | 6.87 | 1.31 | 31 | 6.52 | 1.55 | 0.25 (−0.22; 0.71) | ||
| Cooperation (M) Ainsworth’s Rating Scale | V | 36 | 42 | 6.03 | 1.96 | 31 | 5.48 | 1.98 | 0.28 (−0.19; 0.75) | ||
| Høivik et al 45 | EAS* | V | ~9–10 | 73 | 151.90 | 19.6 | 52 | 145.84 | 29.24 | 0.25 (-0.11; 0.61) | |
| Salomonsson et al 54 | Sensitivity (M) EAS | V | ~11 | 38 | 0.64 | 0.13 | 37 | 0.57 | 0.17 | 0.46 (0.00; 0.92) | |
| Structuring (M) EAS | V | ~11 | 38 | 0.71 | 0.12 | 37 | 0.68 | 0.16 | 0.21 (−0.24; 0.67) | ||
| No intrusiveness (M) EAS | V | ~11 | 38 | 0.78 | 0.16 | 37 | 0.73 | 0.23 | 0.25 (−0.20; 0.71) | ||
| Responsiveness (C) EAS | V | ~11 | 38 | 0.70 | 0.13 | 37 | 0.67 | 0.20 | 0.18 (−0.28; 0.63) | ||
| Involvement (C) EAS | V | ~11 | 38 | 0.69 | 0.14 | 37 | 0.66 | 0.19 | 0.18 (−0.27; 0.63) | ||
| van den Boom49 | Interactive behaviour (M) (in-house) | V | 9 | ~47 | ~47 | 1.78 (1.30; 2.26) | |||||
| Interactive behaviour (C) (in-house) | V* | 9 | ~47 | ~48 | 1.54 (1.08; 2.00) | ||||||
| Klein Velderman et al 51 | Sensitivity (M) Ainsworth’s Rating Scale | V | 11–13 | 54 | 27 | 0.48 (0.02; 0.95) | † | ||||
| Sierau et al 55 | Affectivity (D) MBRS-R | V | 24 | 146 | 3.16 | 0.61 | 142 | 3.35 | 0.63 | −0.31 (−0.54; −0.07) | |
| Responsiveness (D) MBRS-R | 24 | 145 | 3.38 | 0.70 | 140 | 3.54 | 0.68 | −0.23 (−0.46; 0.00) | |||
| Taylor et al 42 | NCATS | V | ~15 | 50 | 59.5 | 6.1 | 50 | 59.4 | 6.0 | 0.00 (−0.39; 0.39)‡ | |
| SF | Parent–child relationship | ||||||||||
| Høivik et al 45 | EAS* | V | ~15–16 | 63 | 153.40 | 22.33 | 47 | 156.15 | 19.25 | 0.13 (−0.25; 0.51) | |
| MF | Parent–child relationship | ||||||||||
| van den Boom50 | Acceptance (M) based on Ainsworth | V | 18 | 43 | 6.86 | 1.19 | 39 | 5.95 | 1.88 | 0.58 (0.14; 1.03) | F=7.04 |
| Accessibility (M) based on Ainsworth | V | 18 | 43 | 6.88 | 1.50 | 39 | 5.87 | 1.89 | 0.60 (0.15; 1.04) | F=7.26 | |
| Cooperation (M) based on Ainsworth | V | 18 | 43 | 6.70 | 1.68 | 39 | 5.18 | 1.65 | 0.91 (0.46;1.37) | F=16.92 | |
| Sensitivity (M) based on Ainsworth | V | 18 | 43 | 6.70 | 1.42 | 39 | 5.26 | 1.92 | 0.86 (0.41; 1.31) | F=15.14 | |
| LF | Parent–child relationship | ||||||||||
| Salomonsson et al 54 | Sensitivity (M) EAS | V | 54 | 33 | 0.68 | 0.12 | 33 | 0.67 | 0.16 | 0.07 (−0.41; 0.55) | |
| Structuring (M) EAS | V | 54 | 33 | 0.66 | 0.12 | 33 | 0.69 | 0.13 | −0.24 (−0.72; 0.24) | ||
| No intrusiveness (M) EAS | V | 54 | 33 | 0.82 | 0.12 | 33 | 0.81 | 0.14 | 0.08 (−0.406; 0.56) | ||
| Responsiveness (C) EAS | V | 54 | 33 | 0.69 | 0.19 | 33 | 0.74 | 0.15 | −0.29 (−0.78; 0.19) | ||
| Involvement (C) EAS | V | 54 | 33 | 0.67 | 0.13 | 33 | 0.72 | 0.16 | −0.34 (−0.83; 0.14) | ||
| PI | Attachment | ||||||||||
| Cassidy et al 44 | Attachment SSP | V | 12 | 85 | 84 | 0.30 (−0.06; 0.66)§ | B=0.54 (SE=0.33), OR=1.72 (0.90; 3.28)¶ | ||||
| Klein Velderman et al 51 | Attachment SSP | V | 13 | 54 | 27 | 0.22 (−0.22; 0.66) | |||||
| SF | Attachment | ||||||||||
| van den Boom49 | Attachment SSP | V | 12 | 50 | 50 | 0.97 (0.48; 1.45)§ | Secure/insecure: intervention—31/19; control—11/39 OR=5.78 (2.40; 13.94); L2(1)=16.96 |
||||
| MF | Attachment | ||||||||||
| van den Boom50 | Attachment SSP | V | 18 | 43 | 39 | 1.07 (0.58; 1.57)§ | χ2=18.35 | ||||
| LF | Attachment | ||||||||||
| Salomonsson et al 53 | Secure attachment SSAP | V | 54 | 31 | 2.22 | 1.05 | 30 | 2.32 | 1.33 | −0.08 (−0.59; 0.42) | |
| Avoidant attachment SSAP* | V | 54 | 31 | 1.05 | 0.48 | 30 | 1.16 | 0.52 | 0.22 (−0.28; 0.72) | ||
| Ambivalent attachment SSAP* | V | 54 | 31 | 0.96 | 0.73 | 30 | 0.84 | 0.61 | −0.18 (−0.68; 0.32) | ||
| Disorganised attachment SSAP* | V | 54 | 31 | 0.80 | 0.84 | 30 | 0.63 | 0.58 | −0.23 (−0.74; 0.27) | ||
Significant effect sizes are marked with bold.
*Reverse scoring—high score is negative.
†Adjusted for pretest sensitivity.
‡No control group. Two interventions were compared.
§Calculation based on dichotomous outcome
¶Adjusted for income, infant sex and irritability.
C, child; CARE, Child–Adult Relationship Experimental; EAS, Emotional Availability Scales; LF, long-term follow-up (>12 months postintervention); M, mother; MBRS-R, Maternal Behaviour Rating Scale-Revised; MF, mid-term follow-up (7–12 months); NCATS, Nursing Child Assessment Teaching Scale; O, observation; P, parent; PI, postintervention; Q, questionnaire; SF, short-term follow-up (≤6 months postintervention); SMIIS, Scales of Mother-Infant Interactional System; SSAP, Story Stem Assessment Profile; SSP, Strange Situation Procedure; U, unadjusted; V, video.