DOI 10.1080/23761407.2017.1319774
Predictors of Consent in a Randomized Field Study in Child Welfare.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often viewed as the "gold standard" for proving the efficacy and effectiveness of new interventions. However, some are skeptical of the generalizability of the findings that RCTs produce. The characteristics of those willing to participate in research studies have the potential to affect the generalizability of its findings. This study examined factors that could influence consent among families recruited to participate in a randomized field trial in a real-world child welfare setting.
METHODS
This study tested the Parent Management Training Oregon Model for children in foster care with serious emotional disturbance. It employed a post-randomization consent design, whereby the entire sample of eligible participants, not just those who are willing to consent to randomization, are included in the sample. Initial eligibility assessment data and data from the federally mandated reporting system for public child welfare agencies provided the pool of potential predictors of consent. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify statistically significant predictors of consent.
RESULTS
Being a dual reunification family was the most significant factor in predicting consent. Unmarried individuals, younger, female parents, cases where parental incarceration was the reason for removal and cases where the removal reason was not due to their children's behavioral problem(s) were also more likely to participate.
DISCUSSION: As one of the first research studies to examine predictors of consent to a randomized field study in child welfare settings, results presented here can act as a preliminary guide for conducting RCTs in child welfare settings.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.