↓ Skip to main content

Psychological interventions for parents of children and adolescents with chronic illness

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 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 (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
31 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
341 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
Psychological interventions for parents of children and adolescents with chronic illness
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009660.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Eccleston, Emma Fisher, Emily Law, Jess Bartlett, Tonya M Palermo

Abstract

Psychological therapies have been developed for parents of children and adolescents with a chronic illness. Such therapies include interventions directed at the parent only or at parent and child/adolescent, and are designed to improve parent, child, and family outcomes. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 8, 2012, (Psychological interventions for parents of children and adolescents with chronic illness). To evaluate the efficacy of psychological therapies that include parents of children and adolescents with chronic illnesses including painful conditions, cancer, diabetes mellitus, asthma, traumatic brain injury (TBI), inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), skin diseases, or gynaecological disorders. We also aimed to evaluate the adverse events related to implementation of psychological therapies for this population. Secondly, we aimed to evaluate the risk of bias of included studies and the quality of outcomes using the GRADE assessment. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological interventions that included parents of children and adolescents with a chronic illness. Databases were searched to July 2014. Included studies were RCTs of psychological interventions that delivered treatment to parents of children and adolescents with a chronic illness compared to an active control, waiting list, or treatment as usual control group. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted from included studies. We analysed data using two categories. First, we analysed data by each individual medical condition collapsing across all treatment classes at two time points. Second, we analysed data by each individual treatment class; cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), family therapy (FT), problem solving therapy (PST) and multisystemic therapy (MST) collapsing across all medical conditions. For both sets of analyses we looked immediately post-treatment and at the first available follow-up. We assessed treatment effectiveness for two primary outcomes: parent behaviour and parent mental health. Five secondary outcomes were extracted; child behaviour/disability, child mental health, child symptoms, family functioning, and adverse events. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed. Thirteen studies were added in this update, giving a total of 47 RCTs. The total number of participants included in the data analyses was 2985, 804 of whom were added to the analyses in the update. The mean age of the children was 14.6 years. Of the 47 RCTs, the studies focused on the following paediatric conditions: n = 14 painful conditions, n = 13 diabetes, n =10 cancer, n = 5 asthma, n = 4 TBI, and n = 1 atopic eczema. We did not identify any studies treating parents of children with gynaecological disorders or IBD. Risk of bias assessments of included studies were predominantly unclear. Evidence quality, assessed using the GRADE criteria, was judged to be of low or very low quality.Analyses of separate medical conditions, across all treatment types, revealed two beneficial effects of psychological therapies for our primary outcomes. First, psychological therapies led to improved adaptive parenting behaviour in parents of children with cancer post-treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.36 to -0.04, Z = 2.44, p = 0.01). In addition, therapies also improved parent mental health at follow-up in this group (SMD = -0.18, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.04, Z = 2.58, p = 0.01). We did not find any effect of therapies for parent behaviour for parents of children with a painful condition post-treatment or at follow-up, or for parent mental health for parents of children with cancer, diabetes, asthma, or TBI post-treatment. For all other primary outcomes, no analysis could be conducted due to lack of data.Across all medical conditions, three effects were found for the primary outcomes of psychological therapies. PST had a beneficial effect on parent adaptive behaviour (SMD = -0.25, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.11, Z = 3.59, p < 0.01) and parent mental health (SMD= -0.24, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.05, Z = 2.50, p = 0.01) immediately post-treatment and this effect was maintained at follow-up for parent mental health (SMD= -0.19, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.04, Z = 2.55, p = 0.01). The remaining analysis for PST on parent behaviour found no effect. No effects were found for CBT post-treatment or at follow-up for either parent outcome. For FT, only one analysis could be run on parent mental health and no effect was found. Due to lack of data, the remaining analyses of primary outcomes could not be run. For MST, no parent outcomes could be analysed due to lack of data.Secondary outcome analyses are presented in the Results section. Five studies reported that there were no adverse events during the trial. The remaining 42 studies did not report adverse events. This update includes 13 additional studies, although our conclusions have not changed from the original version. There is little evidence for the efficacy of psychological therapies that include parents on most outcome domains of functioning, for a large number of common chronic illnesses in children. However, psychological therapies are efficacious for some outcomes. CBT that includes parents is beneficial for reducing children's primary symptoms, and PST that includes parents improved parent adaptive behaviour and parent mental health. There is evidence that the beneficial effects can be maintained at follow-up for diabetes-related symptoms in children, and for the mental health of parents of children with cancer and parents who received PST.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 341 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Unknown 332 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 76 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 68 20%
Unspecified 44 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 10%
Researcher 33 10%
Other 86 25%
Unknown 1 <1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 98 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 85 25%
Unspecified 63 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 41 12%
Social Sciences 23 7%
Other 30 9%
Unknown 1 <1%

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 01 April 2019.
All research outputs
#821,594
of 13,568,727 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,585
of 10,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,298
of 225,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#72
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,568,727 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 10,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 225,191 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.