↓ Skip to main content

Optimising child outcomes from parenting interventions: fathers’ experiences, preferences and barriers to participation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
212 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
Optimising child outcomes from parenting interventions: fathers’ experiences, preferences and barriers to participation
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4426-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucy A. Tully, Patrycja J. Piotrowska, Daniel A. J. Collins, Kathleen S. Mairet, Nicola Black, Eva R. Kimonis, David J. Hawes, Caroline Moul, Rhoshel K. Lenroot, Paul J. Frick, Vicki Anderson, Mark R. Dadds

Abstract

Early childhood interventions can have both immediate and long-term positive effects on cognitive, behavioural, health and education outcomes. Fathers are underrepresented in interventions focusing on the well-being of children. However, father participation may be critical for intervention effectiveness, especially for parenting interventions for child externalising problems. To date, there has been very little research conducted to understand the low rates of father participation and to facilitate the development of interventions to meet the needs of fathers. This study examined fathers' experiences of, and preferences for, parenting interventions as well as perceptions of barriers to participation. It also examined how these factors were associated with child externalising behaviour problems, and explored the predictors of participation in parenting interventions. A community sample of 1001 fathers of children aged 2-16 years completed an online survey about experiences with parenting interventions, perceived barriers to participation, the importance of different factors in their decision to attend, and preferred content and delivery methods. They also completed ratings of their child's behaviour using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Overall, 15% of fathers had participated in a parenting intervention or treatment for child behaviour, with significantly higher rates of participation for fathers of children with high versus low levels of externalising problems. Fathers rated understanding what is involved in the program and knowing that the facilitator is trained as the two most important factors in their decision to participate. There were several barriers to participation that fathers of children with high-level externalising problems were more likely to endorse, across practical barriers and help-seeking attitudes, compared to fathers of children with low-level externalising problems. Almost two-thirds of fathers of children with high-level externalising behaviour had not participated in a parenting intervention or treatment. The only significant predictors of intervention participation were severity of child externalising behaviour problems and child age. The findings have important implications for services seeking to increase father engagement and highlight a number of strategies to enhance the promotion and delivery of parenting interventions to fathers. These strategies include more public health messaging about parenting programs and the importance of father participation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 212 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 212 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Researcher 10 5%
Student > Bachelor 10 5%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 59 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 67 32%
Social Sciences 26 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 7%
Sports and Recreations 3 1%
Other 15 7%
Unknown 70 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 19 July 2017.
All research outputs
#3,582,752
of 25,271,884 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,265
of 16,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,938
of 323,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#82
of 259 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,271,884 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,915 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 323,423 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 259 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.