↓ Skip to main content

The Building Wealth and Health Network: methods and baseline characteristics from a randomized controlled trial for families with young children participating in temporary assistance for needy…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
299 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Building Wealth and Health Network: methods and baseline characteristics from a randomized controlled trial for families with young children participating in temporary assistance for needy families (TANF)
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3233-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing Sun, Falguni Patel, Rachel Kirzner, Nijah Newton-Famous, Constance Owens, Seth L. Welles, Mariana Chilton

Abstract

Families with children under age six participating in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program (TANF) must participate in work-related activities for 20 h per week. However, due to financial hardship, poor health, and exposure to violence and adversity, families may experience great difficulty in reaching self-sufficiency. The purpose of this report is to describe study design and baseline findings of a trauma-informed financial empowerment and peer support intervention meant to mitigate these hardships. We conducted a randomized controlled trial of a 28-week intervention called Building Wealth and Health Network to improve financial security and maternal and child health among caregivers participating in TANF. Participants, recruited from County Assistance offices in Philadelphia, PA, were randomized into two intervention groups (partial and full) and one control group. Participants completed questionnaires at baseline to assess career readiness, economic hardship, health and wellbeing, exposure to adversity and violence, and interaction with criminal justice systems. Baseline characteristics demonstrate that among 103 participants, there were no significant differences by group. Mean age of participants was 25 years, and youngest child was 30 months. The majority of participants were women (94.2 %), never married (83.5 %), unemployed (94.2 %), and without a bank account (66.0 %). Many reported economic hardship (32.0 % very low household food secure, 65.0 % housing insecure, and 31.1 % severe energy insecure), and depression (57.3 %). Exposure to adversity was prevalent, where 38.8 % reported four or more Adverse Childhood Experiences including abuse, neglect and household dysfunction. In terms of community violence, 64.7 % saw a seriously wounded person after an incident of violence, and 27.2 % had seen someone killed. Finally, 14.6 % spent time in an adult correctional institution, and 48.5 % of the fathers of the youngest child spent time in prison. Baseline findings demonstrate that caregivers participating in TANF have suffered significant childhood adversity, adult violence exposure, and poverty-related stressors that can limit workforce success. High prevalence of housing and food insecurity, exposure to adversity, violence and criminal justice systems demands comprehensive programming to support families. Trauma-informed approaches to career readiness such as the Building Wealth and Health Network offer opportunities for potential success in the workforce. This study is retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov The Identifier is: NCT02577705 The Registration date is October 13, 2015.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 299 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Unknown 297 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 13%
Student > Bachelor 30 10%
Researcher 26 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 8%
Other 38 13%
Unknown 97 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 56 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 13%
Social Sciences 37 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 1%
Other 22 7%
Unknown 108 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 September 2016.
All research outputs
#1,073,762
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,168
of 14,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,225
of 356,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#37
of 349 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 356,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 349 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.