↓ Skip to main content

A realist review of family-based interventions for children of substance abusing parents

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, December 2015
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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 realist review of family-based interventions for children of substance abusing parents
Published in
Systematic Reviews, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0158-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amelia M. Usher, Kelly E. McShane, Candice Dwyer

Abstract

Millions of children across North America and Europe live in families with alcohol or drug abusing parents. These children are at risk for a number of negative social, emotional and developmental outcomes, including an increased likelihood of developing a substance use disorder later in life. Family-based intervention programs for children with substance abusing parents can yield positive outcomes. This study is a realist review of evaluations of family-based interventions aimed at improving psychosocial outcomes for children of substance abusing parents (COSAPs). The primary objectives were to uncover patterns of contextual factors and mechanisms that generate program outcomes, and advance program theory in this field. Realist review methodology was chosen as the most appropriate method of systematic review because it is a theory-driven approach that seeks to explore mechanisms underlying program effectiveness (or lack thereof). A systematic and comprehensive search of academic and grey literature uncovered 32 documents spanning 7 different intervention programs. Data was extracted from the included documents using abstraction templates designed to code for contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of each program. Two candidate program theories of family addiction were used to guide data analysis: the family disease model and the family prevention model. Data analysis was undertaken by a research team using an iterative process of comparison and checking with original documents to determine patterns within the data. Programs originating in both the family disease model and the family prevention model were uncovered, along with hybrid programs that successfully included components from each candidate program theory. Four demi-regularities were found to account for the effectiveness of programs included in this review: (1) opportunities for positive parent-child interactions, (2) supportive peer-to-peer relationships, (3) the power of knowledge, and (4) engaging hard to reach families using strategies that are responsive to socio-economic needs and matching services to client lived experience. This review yielded new findings that had not otherwise been explored in COSAP program research and are discussed in order to help expand program theory. Implications for practice and evaluation are further discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 124 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 37 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 20%
Social Sciences 19 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 37 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 15 January 2016.
All research outputs
#1,606,729
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#252
of 2,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,154
of 390,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#11
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 390,611 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 92% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.