Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40734900›Full record

ArticleImplementation research and practice

Re-Implementation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) in the Community: Findings From a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

Melanie J Woodfield, Sarah Fortune, Tania Cargo, Sally Merry, Sarah E Hetrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Melanie J WoodfieldTe Ara Hāro-Centre for Infant, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2405-6044
Sarah FortuneDepartment of Social and Community Health, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8864-8295
Tania CargoTe Ara Hāro-Centre for Infant, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4675-9894
Sally MerryTe Ara Hāro-Centre for Infant, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8281-1573
Sarah E HetrickTe Ara Hāro-Centre for Infant, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2532-0142

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study explored the feasibility, acceptability, and Māori cultural responsivity of study methods and components of an intervention to support clinicians to resume implementation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT), an evidence-based treatment for disruptive behavior in young children. Method: This pragmatic, parallel-arm, randomized, controlled pilot trial ran for a 6-month period and included PCIT-trained clinicians who were not delivering, or only rarely using PCIT in their work. Re-implementation strategies were systematically developed and theory-driven and included a mobile co-worker, a portable time-out space, audio-visual equipment, weekly consultation groups, and 2-day targeted PCIT refresher training. Results: Pre-specified progression criteria included enrolling 20 clinicians, a maximum of 20% attrition, and a monthly survey response rate of at least 80%. Fourteen clinicians enrolled in the trial, there was no attrition, and an 89.8% average survey response rate was achieved. Secondary outcomes included clinician ratings of the usefulness and acceptability of intervention components. The time-out cubicle was considered relatively less useful and acceptable, while the refresher training and manuals were preferred. Study methods and intervention components were considered acceptable by the small proportion of Māori participants. Clinician self-reported Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation to implement PCIT fluctuated monthly across both groups. Pre-/post-changes in each domain within the Theoretical Domains Framework generally showed similar improvement from baseline to follow-up in both groups. There was no observable difference in PCIT adoption in either group. Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to pragmatically attempt to re-implement a parent training intervention in a community setting, several years after clinicians' initial training in the approach (here, an average of 5.36 years). Low attrition and high survey response rates highlighted the feasibility of the data collection methodology. Important opportunities to improve the design of an adequately powered definitive trial are highlighted to minimize future resource waste.

Indexed as

conduct problemsevidence-based treatmentfeasibilityimplementationParent–Child Interaction TherapyPCITre-implementationtime-out

Identifiers

PMID40734900
PMCPMC12304612

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.