Post on 01-Jan-2016
description
Universal prevention with the IY short version
Reedtz, Mørch & Handegård, 2010
Prof. Willy-Tore MørchUniversity of Tromsø, NorwayCardiff March 9th 2011
04/19/232
An RCT from a normal population
• Total of families volunteered=269• 58 children (22%) excluded due to ECBI intensity score > 90% (clinical cut-off)• 22 families (10%) terminated their participation in the initial phase.• Pre-post and 1 yr. Follow-up
• The relation building components of the IY parent program (Meeting 1-6)
04/19/233
RCT from a normal populationparent and child characteristics
• Full time occupation: 61%• Two-parent families: 80%• Bacheor or higher education: 78%
• Children’s age from 2-8, mean age <4• 112 (59%) boys, 77 (41%) girls• Mean ECBI score: 103,3 (SD=16,7) Mean
Norwegian norms 93,0 (SD=23,6) Difference sign: <.001
• No differences between the participants and non-participants (attrition analysis)
04/19/234
Effekter på atferdsproblemer, foreldreferdigheter, foreldres opplevelse av kompetanse
04/19/235
Differanser i Positiv parenting og Harsh diciplin
04/19/236
Årsaker til påmelding
04/19/237
IY in RussiaPreliminary effects from the RCT
• 2008-2009: An RCT with N=86 in Petrozavodsk• Intervention group: N=45, Control group:
N=41• The control group received ”treatment as
usual” (special school).• The intervention group received The Basic
Parent Program
• Russian norms of the ECBI was obtained in 2007.
(urban and rural areas)
04/19/238
Невероятные годы:Родители, дети и учителя -
Программа тренировкиразработана
Каролин Вебстер-Страттон, доктор наук
The Incredible Years Training Series
10/00
04/19/2310
ECBI Intensity score. Pre-post
Significant effect
Eta square = 0.433 is a great effect. Corresponds to Cohens d = 1,58
ANCOVA
04/19/2311
ECBI Problem score. Pre-post
Significant effectEta square = 0.359 is a great effect. Corresponds to Cohens d = 1,41
ANCOVA
04/19/2312
ECBI intensity pre-post-fu
04/19/2313
04/19/2314
1. Over protection
• Time by group effect: P = 0.007• Scale: 0-10
04/19/2315
3. Pandering of child needs (Over satisfaction, spoiling)
• Time by group effect: P < 0.0005• Scale: 0-10
04/19/2316
4. Ignoring of child needs
• Time by group effect: P = 0.075• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2317
6. Insufficiency of demands-duties
• Time by group effect: P < 0.0005• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2318
9. Excessiveness of penalties (sanctions)• Time by group effect: P = 0.002• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2319
10. Minimum of penalties (sanctions)
• Time by group effect: P = 0.08• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2320
11. Instability of parenting style• Time by group effect: P = 0.02• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2321
14. Uncertainty in parent role
• Time by group effect: P < 0.0005• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2322
18. Transition of inter spouse conflict to relationship with child• Time by group effect: P = 0.19• Scale: 0-5
04/19/2323
The Status of IY in Russia and the way ahead
Ultimo 2010: 500 families has received the IYThe Republic of Karelia: 3 citiesMurmansk county, Arkhangelsk county og The Republic
of Komi: 7 cities.
2009: Longlasting collaboration between Norway and Russia about children and crime conviction. Coordinated by The Ministry of childtren, equation beween sexes and inclusion of minorities and The ministry of justise and police matters in Norway. The goals: Exchange of experience and knowledge of prevention of crime and implementation of alternative types penalty to prison for children. The IY is a integrated part of this work as a program documented as effective prevention of juvenile crime (Blueprint).