+

Preparing for Life: An Overview

Finding and Reusing Research Data

Ailbhe Booth(UCD School of Psychology & UCD Geary Institute for Public Policy)

15th June 2017

+‘Preparing for Life’ Programme

Preparing for Life: one of first experimental early childhood

interventions in Ireland

THREE CORE INTERVENTION COMPONENTS

→ Home visiting programme

→ Triple P Positive Parenting Programme

→ Baby Massage

Change Parent Knowledge, Attitudes & Wellbeing

Improve Parenting Behaviour

Improve Child Development

Increase School Readiness

Nutrition, aspirations, morale,

developmental milestones

Responsive to child’s needs, preventative

health care, self-reliant

Fewer injuries, better emotional &

physical health

+Aims

Evaluation Aim: Use a randomised controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of PFL

Intervention Aim: Improve levels of school readiness by assisting parents in developing skills to prepare their children for school

+ ‘Preparing for Life’ Programme

Random Assignment

HIGH TREATMENTN = 115

LOW TREATMENTN = 118

PFL Participants233

1. €100 worth of child developmental materials annually & book packs

2. Facilitated access to enhanced preschool

3. Public health workshops

4. Facilitated access to local services

5. Access to local PFL events

6. Home visiting programme

7. Baby Massage

8. Triple P Positive Parenting Programme

1. €100 worth of child developmental materials annually & book packs

2. Facilitated access to enhanced preschool

3. Public health workshops

4. Facilitated access to local services

5. Access to local PFL events

+ What we found… PFL was effective at improving children’s school readiness

Impact on all 5 domains of school readiness - robust to small sample size, differential attrition, multiple hypothesis testing, differential misreporting & contamination

For more information please see: http://geary.ucd.ie/preparingforlife/

Cognitive DevelopmentUnderstanding information, thinking logically, familiarity with numbers, seeing patterns, and solving puzzles

Language DevelopmentUnderstanding what others are saying, being able to talk to others, and starting to read words

Approaches to LearningBeing excited and interested in learning, able to focus on and complete tasks

Social & Emotional DevelopmentUnderstanding what others are saying, being able to talk to others, and starting to read words

Physical Wellbeing & Motor DevelopmentUnderstanding what others are saying, being able to talk to others, and starting to read words

+ Timeline

Jan 2008

Recruitment & randomisation

Baseline Interview

3 Month PostpartumMaternal cognitive Assessments

6 Month PostpartumMaternal Interview

12 Month PostpartumMaternal Interview

18 Month PostpartumMaternal Interview

24 Month PostpartumMaternal Interview

36 Month PostpartumMaternal Interview

48 Month PostpartumMaternal Interview

48 Month PostpartumChild Direct Assessment

School Start Teacher Assessment

Dec 2015

+ Recruitment & Randomisationhttp://geary.ucd.ie/preparingforlife/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Baseline-Report.pdf

Eligibility Criteria: Pregnant women

Residing in PFL catchment area between Jan 2008-August 2010

PFL Catchment Area:

Original (Jan 2008)

1st expansion (Jan 2009)

2nd expansion (June 2009)

Recruitment: Maternity hospital (~20 weeks) & within the local community

Population-based recruitment rate, based on all live births during the

recruitment phase, was 52% (n=233)

Randomisation: Unconditional probability randomisation strategy

115 allocated to High treatment group

118 allocated to Low treatment group

+Recruitment & Randomisation

0

4

8

12

16

20

Jan March May July Sept Nov Jan March May July Sept Nov Jan March May July

Nu

mb

er

Re

cru

ite

d

Month

Figure 1: Number PFL Participants Recruited Per Month(total = 233; avg. = 7/month)

2008 2009 2010

+ The Data

Gathered between Jan 2008 to Dec 2015

Impact Evaluation 1. Maternal Interviews: 7 home-based assessments (BL – 48)

2. Direct assessments: Cognitive skills & executive functioning at age 4

3. Teacher reported school readiness assessment: S-EDI in junior infants

Implementation Evaluation 1. Focus groups: PFL mothers & father figures

2. Semi-structured interviews: PFL programme staff

3. Semi-structured interviews: PFL children in junior infants

+ PFL Data Collection procedures

Maternal interviews conducted using computer assisted personal

interviewing technique

Field workers were blind to treatment status

Field workers underwent extensive training on conducting

interviews

In house training & practice

In the field shadowing

Inter-rater reliability on observational/direct assessment

components

Any data entry was double entered and checked

+ The Data (8 main domains)CHILD DEVELOPMENT

MATERNAL REPORT & DIRECT ASSESSMENT

Cognitive development (multiple standardised measures), fine and gross motor development, socialand emotional development

PARENTING

ALL MATERNAL REPORT

Maternal perceptions of parenting stress, parenting behaviour, tvexposure

CHILD HEALTH

ALL MATERNAL REPORT*

Health status, hospitalisations, weight, height

HOME ENVIRONMENT

MATERNAL REPORT + SOME OBSERVATION

e.g. Interactions in the home, safety in the home, exposure to smoke

MATERNAL HEALTH & WELLBEING

ALL MATERNAL REPORT

Physical and mental healthe.g. health status, self-esteem, substance use

SOCIAL SUPPORT

ALL MATERNAL REPORT

Perceived support from others, social engagement, service use

CHILDCARE SERVICE USE

ALL MATERNAL REPORT

Childcare attendance & type, satisfaction with childcare

HOUSEHOLD FACTORS & SES

ALL MATERNAL REPORT

Extensive information on demographicse.g. income, employment, welfare receipt

+Attrition

Low treatment mothers who were older, who already had children, and who had better

knowledge of child development when they joined PFL were more likely to stay in the study

Randomised (233)

Low Treatment118

Baseline101

Maternity Hospital Study100

6 Months90

12 Months83

18 Months74

24 Months84

36 Months76

48 Months73

Hospital Study53

Direct Assessment63

School Readiness74

High treatment mothers with better cognitive resources who had a job during pregnancy

were more likely to stay in the study

High Treatment115

Baseline104

Maternity Hospital Study106

6 Months83

12 Months82

18 Months80

24 Months82

36 Months74

48 Months74

Hospital Study55

Direct Assessment71

School Readiness75

65% Retained

63% Retained

+ Thanks to our Funders