Adversity profiles among Canadian families: A secondary data analysis of a randomized controlled trial of the Family Check-Up®.

IF 3.5 2区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL

Development and Psychopathology Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-10 DOI:10.1017/S0954579426101795

Laetitia Mélissande Amédée, Andrea Gonzalez, Krysta Andrews, Amber Rieder, Katrina R Abela, Katholiki Georgiades, Paulo Pires, Magdalena Janus, Ellen Lipman, Teresa Bennett

{"title":"Adversity profiles among Canadian families: A secondary data analysis of a randomized controlled trial of the Family Check-Up®.","authors":"Laetitia Mélissande Amédée, Andrea Gonzalez, Krysta Andrews, Amber Rieder, Katrina R Abela, Katholiki Georgiades, Paulo Pires, Magdalena Janus, Ellen Lipman, Teresa Bennett","doi":"10.1017/S0954579426101795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite widespread implementation of early childhood mental health prevention programs in Canada, variation in response across family adversity contexts remains unclear. Using data from the first Canadian randomized controlled trial of the Family Check-Up® (FCU®), this study examines what works for whom and why. In a sample of 206 caregivers and their two-to four-year-old children (M = 3.42, SD = 0.87; 88.3% White; 57.3% male) we identified four profiles: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged/Low Social Support (30.68%), Low Adversity (31.18%), Caregiver Mental Health Vulnerabilities (20.57%), and High Cumulative Adversity (17.6%). FCU® participation was associated with lower externalizing behaviors across profiles except for the Socioeconomically Disadvantaged/Low Social Support group, with the strongest effect observed among males in the High Cumulative Adversity profile (ß = -0.525, p = .002, 95% CI [-0.861, -0.189]). No effects were found for internalizing behaviors. Findings highlight the need to consider family risk factors and child sex when evaluating prevention programs.","PeriodicalId":11265,"journal":{"name":"Development and Psychopathology","volume":" ","pages":"2057-2069"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development and Psychopathology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579426101795","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite widespread implementation of early childhood mental health prevention programs in Canada, variation in response across family adversity contexts remains unclear. Using data from the first Canadian randomized controlled trial of the Family Check-Up® (FCU®), this study examines what works for whom and why. In a sample of 206 caregivers and their two-to four-year-old children (M = 3.42, SD = 0.87; 88.3% White; 57.3% male) we identified four profiles: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged/Low Social Support (30.68%), Low Adversity (31.18%), Caregiver Mental Health Vulnerabilities (20.57%), and High Cumulative Adversity (17.6%). FCU® participation was associated with lower externalizing behaviors across profiles except for the Socioeconomically Disadvantaged/Low Social Support group, with the strongest effect observed among males in the High Cumulative Adversity profile (ß = -0.525, p = .002, 95% CI [-0.861, -0.189]). No effects were found for internalizing behaviors. Findings highlight the need to consider family risk factors and child sex when evaluating prevention programs.

查看原文本刊更多论文

加拿大家庭的逆境概况：Family Check-Up®随机对照试验的辅助数据分析。

尽管在加拿大广泛实施了早期儿童心理健康预防计划，但不同家庭逆境背景下的反应差异仍不清楚。本研究使用加拿大首个家庭检查®（FCU®）随机对照试验的数据，检验了什么对谁有效以及为什么有效。在206名照顾者及其2至4岁儿童的样本中（M = 3.42, SD = 0.87； 88.3%白人；57.3%男性），我们确定了四种特征：社会经济弱势/低社会支持（30.68%）、低逆境（31.18%）、照顾者心理健康脆弱性（20.57%）和高累积逆境（17.6%）。FCU®参与与较低的外化行为相关，除了社会经济弱势/低社会支持组，在高累积逆境组的男性中观察到最强的影响（ß = -0.525, p = 0.002, 95% CI[-0.861, -0.189]）。内化行为没有发现任何影响。研究结果强调，在评估预防项目时，需要考虑家庭风险因素和儿童性别。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Development and Psychopathology PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

9.10%

发文量

319

期刊介绍： This multidisciplinary journal is devoted to the publication of original, empirical, theoretical and review papers which address the interrelationship of normal and pathological development in adults and children. It is intended to serve and integrate the field of developmental psychopathology which strives to understand patterns of adaptation and maladaptation throughout the lifespan. This journal is of interest to psychologists, psychiatrists, social scientists, neuroscientists, paediatricians, and researchers.