Basha Sydni A J, Kim Joanna J, Cai Qiyue, Kuckertz Mary, Gewirtz Abigail H
Arizona State University, Department of Psychology, The REACH Institute, 900 S. McAllister Avenue, Suite 205, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Arizona State University, Department of Psychology, The REACH Institute, 900 S. McAllister Avenue, Suite 205, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2025 Feb;115:102531. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102531. Epub 2024 Dec 17.
As developers and practitioners translate parenting interventions from research to practice, significant heterogeneity in provider fidelity and parent engagement with the program has contributed to observed declines in intervention effectiveness. Despite this, empirical investigations of the relationship between provider fidelity, parent engagement, and intervention outcomes are scarce and those that exist show discrepant outcomes. This is, in part, due to the variability in the way fidelity is defined, operationalized, and measured. Therefore, following PRISMA-P guidelines, this review elucidates the relationship between provider fidelity, parent engagement, and intervention outcomes in parenting interventions, with a particular emphasis on how provider fidelity is defined and measured. A systematic search revealed 264 articles, of which 25 met inclusion criteria. As anticipated, results suggest that there are inconsistencies in the relationship between provider fidelity, parent engagement, and intervention outcomes, and these inconsistencies appear related to how fidelity is defined. Across studies, definitions of fidelity were related to one or more dimensions, including adherence, competence/quality, and knowledge, with those measures that captured all three dimensions demonstrating the most consistency in the relation between fidelity and intervention outcomes. Although methodological limitations exist, increased precision in fidelity measurement will have positive implications for the widespread implementation of parenting programs.
随着开发者和从业者将育儿干预措施从研究转化为实践,提供者的保真度以及家长对该项目的参与度存在显著异质性,这导致了观察到的干预效果下降。尽管如此,关于提供者保真度、家长参与度和干预结果之间关系的实证研究却很匮乏,而且已有的研究结果也不一致。这在一定程度上是由于保真度在定义、操作化和测量方式上存在差异。因此,遵循系统评价与Meta分析方案的首选报告项目(PRISMA-P)指南,本综述阐明了育儿干预中提供者保真度、家长参与度和干预结果之间的关系,特别强调了提供者保真度是如何定义和测量的。一项系统检索共找到264篇文章,其中25篇符合纳入标准。正如预期的那样,结果表明,提供者保真度、家长参与度和干预结果之间的关系存在不一致之处,而且这些不一致似乎与保真度的定义方式有关。在各项研究中,保真度的定义与一个或多个维度相关,包括依从性、能力/质量和知识,那些涵盖所有三个维度的测量方法在保真度与干预结果之间的关系上表现出最大的一致性。尽管存在方法学上的局限性,但保真度测量精度的提高将对育儿项目的广泛实施产生积极影响。