Promoting Child Development Through Group-Based Parent Support Within a Cash Transfer Program: Experimental Effects on Children's Outcomes
Promoting Child Development Through Group-Based Parent Support Within a Cash Transfer Program: Experimental Effects on Children's Outcomes
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/dev0000185
复制
发表时间：
2017-02-01
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Neufeld, Lynnette M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fernald, Lia C. H.;Kagawa, Rose M. C.;Neufeld, Lynnette M.
我们研究了儿童发展的影响，以小组为基础的育儿支持计划（Educacion Inicial -EI）时，结合墨西哥的有条件现金转移支付（CCT）计划（Prospera，最初Occupidades和Progresa）。这项随机分组试验包括204个社区（最终样本中n = 1，113名儿童），按社区土著地位分层，并分配接受：（T-0）仅CCT;（T-1）CCT加社区EI可用性;或（T-2）T-1加CCT计划推广EI计划。在基线（2008年，0-18个月大的儿童）和随访（2012年，3-5岁的儿童）时，对每个儿童的母亲或主要照顾者进行了访谈;干预在基线后开始，并继续对所有符合条件的家庭进行。认知发展评估与扩展年龄和阶段问卷（基线）和麦卡锡儿童发展量表（随访）;评估者对治疗不知情。所有分析均为意向性治疗，当情绪智力得到持续性治疗计划的支持与推广后，对儿童的发展有显著的影响（T-2 vs. T-0：一般认知指数，β = 3.90; 95% CI [0.51，7.30]，言语评分，β = 4.28; 95% CI [0.51，8.05]，记忆评分，β = 4.14; 95% CI [0.62，7.66]），效应相当于0.26-0.29 SD。当程序独立运行时（T-1 vs. T-0），没有显著的益处。在分层分析中，EI仅在土著社区中显示出显著影响。我们发现一致的回归控制协变量的结果，与一些减少的幅度的差异。我们的研究结果表明，以小组为基础的，亲职支持计划可以改善儿童的结果在CCT的背景下，但只有当2个程序是集成和相互支持的。
We examined effects on child development of a group-based parenting support program (Educacion Inicial -EI) when combined with Mexico's conditional cash transfer (CCT) program (Prospera, originally Oportunidades and Progresa). This cluster-randomized trial included 204 communities (n = 1,113 children in final sample), stratified by community indigenous status, and assigned to receive either: (T-0) CCT only; (T-1) CCT plus availability of EI in the community; or (T-2) T-1 plus promotion of the EI program by the CCT program. Interviews were conducted with the mother or primary caregiver of each child at baseline (2008, children 0-18 months old), and at follow-up (2012, children 3-5 years old); the intervention began after baseline and continued for all eligible households. Cognitive development was assessed with the Extended Ages and Stages Questionnaire (baseline) and the McCarthy Scales of Children's Development (follow-up); assessors were blinded to treatment. All analyses were intention to treat. There were significant effects on child development when EI received support and promotion from the CCT program (T-2 vs. T-0: General Cognitive Index, beta = 3.90; 95% CI [0.51, 7.30], Verbal Score, beta = 4.28; 95% CI [0.51, 8.05], and Memory Score, beta = 4.14; 95% CI [0.62, 7.66]), effects equivalent to 0.26-0.29 SD. There were no significant benefits when the programs operated independently (T-1 vs. T-0). In stratified analyses, EI showed significant effects in indigenous communities only. We found consistent results in regressions controlling for covariates, with some reductions in magnitude of differences. Our findings suggest that group-based, parenting support programs can improve child outcomes within the context of a CCT, but only when the 2 programs are integrated and mutually supportive.