↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of a parenting intervention in community (school) settings for children at risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
186 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
A qualitative process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of a parenting intervention in community (school) settings for children at risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0670-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

John A. Taylor, Althea Z. Valentine, Edward Sellman, Kate Bransby-Adams, David Daley, Kapil Sayal

Abstract

Interventions for parents of children experiencing emotional and/or behavioural difficulties can help to improve their children's health, educational and social outcomes. However, the desirability and acceptability of screening and offering such interventions for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-type problems are currently unclear. This article is a qualitative process evaluation of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (Trial registration: ISRCTN87634685; reported elsewhere) to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a school-based parenting intervention programme for parents and teachers of children with high levels of ADHD symptoms. Parents (n = 22) and teaching staff (n = 29) took part in semi-structured group or individual interviews, either by telephone or face-to-face, following the main trial. Interviews were digitally-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis. The parenting intervention was acceptable to parents and teachers, and they were enthusiastic about the need for parenting groups in the school environment and stressed the importance of parent-school collaboration. Parents generally stated a preference for universal recruitment approaches to such programmes whilst teachers described the need to target specific parents. Most parents who took part in the parenting intervention described it favourably and many saw benefits, at least in the short-term. Parents differed in their preferred group size, with some desiring one-to-one sessions and others favouring a larger group. Non-attending parents reported barriers to attendance such as fear of attending in a group, previous use of the programme, work and other commitments. Suggestions to improve the programme included: clearer communication; offering booster sessions; and greater collaboration with teachers. It is feasible to deliver parenting intervention programmes within or near schools. The intervention was acceptable to the majority of parents, thus retention was high, but recruitment was difficult and reaching the parents with the most need was challenging. The findings of the process evaluation identified greater benefits to families than were apparent in the main trial. Recommendations identified by parents and teaching staff may be used to inform service delivery and future research to enhance recruitment to parenting interventions in the school environment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 185 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 13%
Researcher 19 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Other 35 19%
Unknown 52 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 16%
Social Sciences 18 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 6%
Neuroscience 5 3%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 57 31%
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 29 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,828,686
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,201
of 4,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,220
of 386,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#53
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,692 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 386,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.