↓ Skip to main content

The CHIP-Family study to improve the psychosocial wellbeing of young children with congenital heart disease and their families: design of a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
316 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 CHIP-Family study to improve the psychosocial wellbeing of young children with congenital heart disease and their families: design of a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-1183-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malindi van der Mheen, Ingrid M. van Beynum, Karolijn Dulfer, Jan van der Ende, Eugène van Galen, Jorieke Duvekot, Lisette E. Rots, Tabitha P. L. van den Adel, Ad J. J. C. Bogers, Christopher G. McCusker, Frank A. Casey, Willem A. Helbing, Elisabeth M. W. J. Utens

Abstract

Children with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at increased risk for behavioral, emotional, and cognitive problems. They often have reduced exercise capacity and participate less in sports, which is associated with a lower quality of life. Starting school may present more challenges for children with CHD and their families than for families with healthy children. Moreover, parents of children with CHD are at risk for psychosocial problems. Therefore, a family-centered psychosocial intervention for children with CHD when starting school is needed. Until now, the 'Congenital Heart Disease Intervention Program (CHIP) - School' is the only evidence-based intervention in this field. However, CHIP-School targeted parents only and resulted in non-significant, though positive, effects as to child psychosocial wellbeing. Hence, we expanded CHIP by adding a specific child module and including siblings, creating the CHIP-Family intervention. The CHIP-Family study aims to (1) test the effects of CHIP-Family on parental mental health and psychosocial wellbeing of CHD-children and to (2) identify baseline psychosocial and medical predictors for the effectiveness of CHIP-Family. We will conduct a single-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of CHIP-Family with care as usual (no psychosocial intervention). Children with CHD (4-7 years old) who are starting or attending kindergarten or primary school (first or second year) at the time of first assessment and their families are eligible. CHIP-Family consists of a separate one-day workshop for parents and children. The child workshop consists of psychological exercises based on the evidence-based cognitive behavioral therapy Fun FRIENDS protocol and sports exercises. The parent workshop focuses on problem prevention therapy, psychoeducation, general parenting skills, skills specific to parenting a child with CHD, and medical issues. Approximately 4 weeks after the workshop, parents receive an individual follow-up session. The baseline (T1) and follow-up assessment (T2 = 6 months after T1) consist of online questionnaires filled out by the child, parents, and teacher (T2 only). Primary outcome measures are the CBCL for children and the SCL-90-R for parents. This trial aims to test the effects of an early family-centered psychosocial intervention to meet the compelling need of young children with CHD and their families to prevent (further) problems. If CHIP-Family proves to be effective, it should be structurally implemented in standard care. Dutch Trial Registry; NTR6063 on 23 August, 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 316 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 316 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 41 13%
Student > Bachelor 28 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 6%
Researcher 19 6%
Other 40 13%
Unknown 144 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 45 14%
Psychology 37 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 9%
Sports and Recreations 16 5%
Social Sciences 14 4%
Other 25 8%
Unknown 152 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#4,047,338
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#688
of 3,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,727
of 326,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#32
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 326,948 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 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 55% of its contemporaries.