↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of Stepping Stones Triple P parenting support in parents of children with borderline to mild intellectual disability and psychosocial problems: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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 effectiveness of Stepping Stones Triple P parenting support in parents of children with borderline to mild intellectual disability and psychosocial problems: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Medicine, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12916-014-0191-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marijke Kleefman, Daniëlle EMC Jansen, Roy E Stewart, Sijmen A Reijneveld

Abstract

BackgroundChildren with borderline to mild intellectual disability (BMID) have been shown to be at increased risk for psychosocial problems. The presence of these psychosocial problems leads to parenting stress. Stepping Stones Triple P (SSTP) is a parenting support program to support parents with children with BMID and psychosocial problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of SSTP compared to Care as Usual (CAU) in reducing psychosocial problems in children with BMID.MethodWe conducted a randomized controlled trial in the Northern provinces of the Netherlands. Parents of children aged 5 to 12 with borderline (IQ 70 to 85) or mild (IQ 70 to 50) ID and psychosocial problems were invited. Psychosocial problems were identified using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) parent report (¿14). Measurements were assessed before the intervention (T0), immediately after the intervention (T1) and after a follow-up of six months (T2). SSTP takes 8 to 10 individual sessions of 40-90 minutes, provided over 10 to 12 weeks. CAU concerned any service, except SSTP. Primary outcomes were the child¿s psychosocial problems (SDQ parent and teacher forms and the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory, ECBI). Secondary outcomes were parenting stress (Parenting Stress Index, PSI) and parenting skills (Alabama Parenting Questionnaire, APQ).ResultsIn total 209 parents of children aged 5 to 12 with BMID were allocated blindly to either SSTP (n =111) or CAU (n =98). In the intention to treat analyses, SSTP achieved no significantly better effect than CAU for the SDQ parent report, the ECBI and the APQ on the short- and long- term. In the short term, SSTP was significantly more effective than CAU for the SDQ teacher report (B¿=¿-2.25, 95% CI -3.79 to -0.71) and the PSI (B¿=¿-7.06, 95% CI -12.11 to -2.01). For both SDQ teacher report and PSI, there was no statistically significant effect in the long term. Dropout from SSTP was considerable (49%), with the effects being solely found in the adherent SSTP subgroup.ConclusionsSSTP had some short-term advantages over CAU, but not in the longer term.Trial registrationDutch Trial Register NTR2624. Registered 26 November 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 119 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 38 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 17%
Social Sciences 16 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 47 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 February 2015.
All research outputs
#13,735,023
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,851
of 3,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,461
of 260,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#76
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 260,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.