Child abuse & neglect · 2025
Breaking the cycle: A systematic review of intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment and preventive parenting interventions.
СтатьяСистематический обзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Ahmed Rasha Sayed, Shaban Mostafa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Child maltreatment is a major global public health concern with well-documented intergenerational patterns. Parents with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are at increased risk of perpetuating harmful parenting practices. However, evidence suggests that targeted parenting interventions can disrupt this cycle, particularly when grounded in trauma-informed care.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and synthesize empirical evidence on the effectiveness of parenting interventions aimed at preventing the intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment among caregivers with histories of childhood trauma or adversity.
PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Eighteen eligible studies (RCTs/quasi-experimental) with caregivers who had ACEs/trauma; the search imposed no geographic limits, though all included studies were conducted in the United States, Canada, Ireland, South Korea, and Sweden. Participants were parents or primary caregivers with documented histories of ACEs or trauma, and children aged 0-18 years.
METHODS: A systematic search of six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) was conducted through July 2025, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated parenting interventions with trauma-affected caregivers and reported outcomes related to parenting behavior, child development, or maltreatment risk. Risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Data were synthesized narratively and thematically.
RESULTS: Across 18 studies, effects clustered by intervention family. Child-Parent Psychotherapy (CPP) yielded moderate-large reductions in caregiver PTSD/depression and child PTSD/behavior (η2 ≈ 0.22-0.31). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) reduced harsh/coercive parenting and child conduct problems, and in one trial lowered maltreatment recidivism versus services-as-usual. Group psychoeducation/attachment-support programs in the MEP/Mom Power family improved parenting stress and self-efficacy (d ≈ 0.41-0.74). Mindfulness-based parenting increased mindful parenting and reduced parenting stress; video-feedback (e.g., CAVES) reduced negative parental attributions; self-regulation curricula (e.g., UYCB) improved caregiver regulation with mixed short-term child outcomes; and safety-skills curricula (e.g., Safer Kids) showed high completion but no between-group advantage at short follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Trauma-informed dyadic psychotherapy (CPP) and live-coaching behavioral training (PCIT) show the most consistent benefits-improving caregiver PTSD/depression and parenting/child behavior, with recidivism reduction documented for PCIT. Group psychoeducation, mindfulness-based parenting, and video-feedback appear complementary for stress regulation, self-efficacy, and reflective functioning. To ensure impact reaches families most affected by structural disadvantage, programmes should adopt equity-by-design (co-designed, hybrid/home-based, bilingual/bicultural, dose-flexible delivery with transport/childcare supports). Mechanism-focused and LMIC evaluations remain priorities.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and synthesize empirical evidence on the effectiveness of parenting interventions aimed at preventing the intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment among caregivers with histories of childhood trauma or adversity.
PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Eighteen eligible studies (RCTs/quasi-experimental) with caregivers who had ACEs/trauma; the search imposed no geographic limits, though all included studies were conducted in the United States, Canada, Ireland, South Korea, and Sweden. Participants were parents or primary caregivers with documented histories of ACEs or trauma, and children aged 0-18 years.
METHODS: A systematic search of six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) was conducted through July 2025, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated parenting interventions with trauma-affected caregivers and reported outcomes related to parenting behavior, child development, or maltreatment risk. Risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Data were synthesized narratively and thematically.
RESULTS: Across 18 studies, effects clustered by intervention family. Child-Parent Psychotherapy (CPP) yielded moderate-large reductions in caregiver PTSD/depression and child PTSD/behavior (η2 ≈ 0.22-0.31). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) reduced harsh/coercive parenting and child conduct problems, and in one trial lowered maltreatment recidivism versus services-as-usual. Group psychoeducation/attachment-support programs in the MEP/Mom Power family improved parenting stress and self-efficacy (d ≈ 0.41-0.74). Mindfulness-based parenting increased mindful parenting and reduced parenting stress; video-feedback (e.g., CAVES) reduced negative parental attributions; self-regulation curricula (e.g., UYCB) improved caregiver regulation with mixed short-term child outcomes; and safety-skills curricula (e.g., Safer Kids) showed high completion but no between-group advantage at short follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Trauma-informed dyadic psychotherapy (CPP) and live-coaching behavioral training (PCIT) show the most consistent benefits-improving caregiver PTSD/depression and parenting/child behavior, with recidivism reduction documented for PCIT. Group psychoeducation, mindfulness-based parenting, and video-feedback appear complementary for stress regulation, self-efficacy, and reflective functioning. To ensure impact reaches families most affected by structural disadvantage, programmes should adopt equity-by-design (co-designed, hybrid/home-based, bilingual/bicultural, dose-flexible delivery with transport/childcare supports). Mechanism-focused and LMIC evaluations remain priorities.