Trial Outcomes & Findings for Family Partner Navigation for Children (NCT NCT03569449)
NCT ID: NCT03569449
Last Updated: 2025-11-26
Results Overview
Successful behavioral health service goal completion obtained from the electronic health record including Family Partner's template documentation.
Recruitment status
COMPLETED
Study phase
NA
Target enrollment
312 participants
Primary outcome timeframe
6 months
Results posted on
2025-11-26
Participant Flow
The total enrolled refers to the number of dyads.
Both a parent or legal guardian and a child were included in the dyad. Dyads were randomized as a single unit to a condition.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
Clinic \& community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, \& individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
20
|
24
|
18
|
19
|
21
|
17
|
19
|
20
|
19
|
21
|
20
|
19
|
19
|
18
|
19
|
19
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
20
|
22
|
18
|
17
|
20
|
17
|
19
|
20
|
19
|
21
|
20
|
19
|
19
|
18
|
18
|
19
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
Clinic \& community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, \& individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Lost to Follow-up
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
|
Overall Study
Withdrawal by Subject
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Baseline Characteristics
Child age
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=20 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=24 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=18 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=19 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=21 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=19 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=20 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=21 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=20 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=18 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Total
n=312 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
6.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.0 • n=492 Participants • Child age
|
7.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.9 • n=492 Participants • Child age
|
7.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.0 • n=984 Participants • Child age
|
7.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.5 • n=3 Participants • Child age
|
6.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.5 • n=8 Participants • Child age
|
7.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.8 • n=3 Participants • Child age
|
6.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.9 • n=5 Participants • Child age
|
6.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1 • n=9 Participants • Child age
|
7.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.8 • n=6 Participants • Child age
|
6.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.3 • n=45 Participants • Child age
|
7.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1 • n=1 Participants • Child age
|
6.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.5 • n=1 Participants • Child age
|
7.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.3 • n=124 Participants • Child age
|
7.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.3 • n=57 Participants • Child age
|
6.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1 • n=114 Participants • Child age
|
7.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.7 • n=115 Participants • Child age
|
7.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1 • n=56 Participants • Child age
|
|
Sex/Gender, Customized
Male
|
12 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
17 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
12 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
11 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
15 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
12 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
16 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
12 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
10 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
14 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
7 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
8 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
8 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
8 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
12 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
13 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
187 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
|
Sex/Gender, Customized
Female
|
8 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
7 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
6 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
8 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
6 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
4 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
3 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
8 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
9 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
6 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
11 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
11 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
11 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
10 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
7 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
6 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
121 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
|
Sex/Gender, Customized
Refused to answer
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
1 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
2 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
0 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
4 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child sex/gender
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black/African Am
|
2 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
4 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
4 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
5 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
4 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
5 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
54 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
|
6 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
7 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
4 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
4 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
4 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
5 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
5 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
7 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
5 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
85 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
|
1 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
11 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Unknown
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
3 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
More than one race
|
3 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
14 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
1 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
0 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
2 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
11 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic
|
8 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
12 Participants
n=492 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
9 Participants
n=984 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
9 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
10 Participants
n=8 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
7 Participants
n=3 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
8 Participants
n=9 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
9 Participants
n=6 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
9 Participants
n=45 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
9 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
8 Participants
n=1 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
6 Participants
n=124 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
8 Participants
n=57 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
7 Participants
n=114 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
8 Participants
n=115 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
134 Participants
n=56 Participants • Child race/ethnicity
|
|
Region of Enrollment
United States
|
20 participants
n=492 Participants
|
24 participants
n=492 Participants
|
18 participants
n=984 Participants
|
19 participants
n=3 Participants
|
21 participants
n=8 Participants
|
17 participants
n=3 Participants
|
19 participants
n=5 Participants
|
20 participants
n=9 Participants
|
19 participants
n=6 Participants
|
21 participants
n=45 Participants
|
20 participants
n=1 Participants
|
19 participants
n=1 Participants
|
19 participants
n=124 Participants
|
18 participants
n=57 Participants
|
19 participants
n=114 Participants
|
19 participants
n=115 Participants
|
312 participants
n=56 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 monthsPopulation: Data are available for all 312 dyads.
Successful behavioral health service goal completion obtained from the electronic health record including Family Partner's template documentation.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=20 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=24 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=18 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=19 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=21 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=19 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=20 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=21 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=20 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=18 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=19 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Goal Completion
|
9 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 18 monthsPopulation: This outcome was calculated for dyads with successful goal completion. This measure examines goal completion up to 18 months from baseline.
Time to goal completion obtained from the electronic health record including Family Partner's template documentation.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=12 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=14 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=11 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=13 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=12 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=11 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=6 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=8 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=10 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=8 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=10 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=9 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=10 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=11 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Time to Goal Completion
|
168 days
Interval 15.0 to 302.0
|
159.5 days
Interval 0.0 to 212.0
|
179 days
Interval 66.0 to 239.0
|
177 days
Interval 28.0 to 428.0
|
184 days
Interval 35.0 to 280.0
|
193 days
Interval 40.0 to 374.0
|
218.5 days
Interval 169.0 to 311.0
|
191 days
Interval 59.0 to 287.0
|
179 days
Interval 0.0 to 259.0
|
182 days
Interval 36.0 to 240.0
|
190 days
Interval 19.0 to 226.0
|
191 days
Interval 127.0 to 390.0
|
173 days
Interval 68.0 to 292.0
|
268.5 days
Interval 136.0 to 502.0
|
190.5 days
Interval 0.0 to 277.0
|
192.5 days
Interval 25.0 to 307.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, 6 monthsPopulation: This survey is appropriate for children 3-5 years of age therefore administered to a subset of children. In addition, the SWYC was part of the "enhanced" factor and therefore was only administered in 8 out of 16 conditions.
The Survey of Well-being of Young Children (SWYC) screens for cognitive, motor, language, and social-emotional development among children up to 5½ years of age. Behavioral symptoms were tracked using the SWYC's subscale called the Preschool Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PPSC). The PPSC is an 18-item questionnaire. The total score is summed and can range from 0 to 36. A PPSC total score of 9 or greater indicates that a child is "at risk". Change in the SWYC's PPSC subscale was calculated by finding the difference between the 6 month score and baseline. Participants with increased risk at 6-month is a change from a PPSC total score of below 9 at baseline (low risk) to a score of 9 or greater at 6-month (at risk). Decreased risk at 6-month is a change from a PPSC total score at or above 9 at baseline (at risk) to one below 9 at 6-month follow-up (low risk). No change is either both scores remained "at risk" or both scores remained "low risk".
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=4 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=6 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=3 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=6 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=4 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=6 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=3 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=5 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Survey of Well-being of Young Children (SWYC)
Increased risk
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
|
Change in the Survey of Well-being of Young Children (SWYC)
Decreased risk
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
2 Participants
|
—
|
2 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
|
Change in the Survey of Well-being of Young Children (SWYC)
No change in risk
|
—
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
2 Participants
|
—
|
3 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, 6 monthsPopulation: This survey is appropriate for children 4-18 years old. It was administered to eligible children 5-12 years old in the study. In addition, the PSC-17 was part of the "enhanced" factor and therefore was only administered in 8 out of 16 conditions.
Scores from the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17) will be used to assess child symptoms. The PSC-17 is a 17-item psychosocial screen designed to recognize cognitive, emotional, and behavioral problems. A value of 0 is assigned to "Never", 1 to "Sometimes," and 2 to "Often". The total score is calculated as a sum each of the 17-item level scores, with a potential range of total scores of 0 to 34. A PSC-17 score of 15 or higher suggests the presence of significant behavioral or emotional problems or "at risk". Change in the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17) total score was calculated between the baseline and 6-month follow-up. Increased risk at 6-month is a change from a PSC-17 total score from below 15 at baseline to a score of 15 or greater at 6-month. Decreased risk at 6-month is a change from a PPSC total score at or above 15 at baseline to one below 15 at 6-month follow-up. No change is either both scores remained "at risk" or both scores remained "low risk".
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=11 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=7 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=5 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=7 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=9 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=5 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=6 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=6 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Change in Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17)
Increased risk
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
|
Change in Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17)
Decreased risk
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
2 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
1 Participants
|
—
|
2 Participants
|
|
Change in Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17)
No change in risk
|
—
|
9 Participants
|
—
|
5 Participants
|
—
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
6 Participants
|
—
|
5 Participants
|
—
|
5 Participants
|
—
|
5 Participants
|
—
|
3 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 monthsPopulation: There were 75 parents who could not be reached through telephone calls for survey administration at the 6-month time frame.
The Satisfaction with Hospital Care Questionnaire (SHCQ) addresses aspects of hospital care. Three subscales were used: Information (6 questions), Patient Autonomy (2 questions), and Emotional Support (3 questions). Each question is self rated on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1=poor and 10 = excellent. Total scores were summed across the three subscales. Total scores can range from 11 to 110. Higher scores suggest greater satisfaction with hospital care.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=15 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=11 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=15 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=16 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=12 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Satisfaction With Hospital Care Questionnaire (SHCQ)
|
90.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.5
|
91.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 15.5
|
91.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.0
|
96.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.1
|
92.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.1
|
89.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.8
|
83.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.0
|
92.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.4
|
90.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.5
|
83.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.0
|
86.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.2
|
89.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.2
|
83.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.2
|
94.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.7
|
87.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.9
|
87.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 monthsPopulation: There were 75 parents who could not be reached through telephone calls for survey administration at the 6-month time frame.
The Interpersonal Relationship with Navigator (PSN-I) tool is a validated 9-item scale with strong psychometric properties in samples of culturally diverse, underserved patients. For each item the participant can respond, "strongly disagree" =1, "disagree" =2, "are undecided"=3, "agree" =4, or "strongly agree" =5. Total scores are summed across the 9-items and can range from 9 to 45; higher scores indicate higher satisfaction with their interpersonal relationship with the patient navigator.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=15 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=11 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=16 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=16 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=12 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Interpersonal Relationship With Navigator (PSN-I)
|
31.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.6
|
35.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.1
|
30.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.3
|
31.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.3
|
30.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.1
|
33.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.3
|
32.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.8
|
30.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.8
|
30.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.4
|
32.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.5
|
33.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.7
|
26.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.9
|
32.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.6
|
27.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.9
|
34.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.7
|
26.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, 6 monthsPopulation: There were 75 parents who could not be reached through telephone calls for survey administration at the 6-month time frame. There were also 4 parents who completed less than 10% of the survey due to time constraints. Parents missing either a baseline or 6 month score could not be analyzed for a change in score.
The Family Resource Scale (FRS) is a 30-item scale assessing numerous family needs and factors: growth/support, health/necessities, physical necessities, physical shelter, intra-family support, communication/employment, child care, and personal resources. Each item is rated on a five-point scale ranging from "not-at-all-adequate" to "almost-always-adequate". Total scores were calculated by a sum across the 30-items. The minimum score is 30 and the maximum score is 150. Higher scores indicate more adequate levels of family resources. Change in score was calculated by taking the difference between total scores at baseline and 6 months. This was done by subtracting 6 month scores from baseline scores for each participant. Of note, a negative change value is due to a higher scores at baseline than at 6 months. The differences were averaged across the participants in each condition.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=15 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=10 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=16 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=15 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=12 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Change in Family Resource Scale (FRS)
|
0.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.6
|
0.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
0.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.4
|
0.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.7
|
0.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.7
|
0.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.4
|
0.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.7
|
0.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.9
|
0.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.9
|
0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.6
|
0.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.5
|
0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.6
|
0.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.7
|
0.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.4
|
0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.6
|
0.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.8
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, 6 monthsPopulation: This survey was part of the "enhanced" factor and therefore was only administered to 8 out of 16 conditions. This survey was administered to the parents/guardians.
The Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) is a validated 2-question depression screening tool. PHQ-2 total score ranges from 0-6. The authors of the measure identified a score of 3 as the optimal cut-point when using the PHQ-2 to screen for depression. If the score is 3 or greater, major depressive disorder is likely. Change in score was calculated by taking the difference between total scores at baseline and 6 months. This was done by subtracting 6 month scores from baseline scores for each participant. Of note, a negative change value is due to a higher scores at baseline than at 6 months. The differences were averaged across the participants in each condition.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=13 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=13 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=8 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=13 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=15 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=11 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=11 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=11 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Change in Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2)
|
—
|
0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.6
|
—
|
-0.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.5
|
—
|
-1.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.3
|
—
|
-0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.4
|
—
|
-0.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.0
|
—
|
-0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.6
|
—
|
0.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.1
|
—
|
0.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, 6 monthsPopulation: There were 75 parents who could not be reached through telephone calls for survey administration at the 6-month time point. There were also 4 parents who completed less than 10% of the survey due to time constraints.
The Parental Attitudes Toward Psychological Services Inventory (PATPSI) measure consists of 26 Likert-type items, assessing help-seeking attitudes, help-seeking intentions, and mental health stigma, and is scored on a Likert-type scale from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Scores can range from 0 to 130. Higher scores are more favorable. Change in score was calculated by taking the difference between total scores at baseline and 6 months. This was done by subtracting 6 month scores from baseline scores for each participant. Of note, a negative change value is due to a higher scores at baseline than at 6 months. The differences were averaged across the participants in each condition.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Group 1- Goat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 2- Cow
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 3- Horse
n=15 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 4- Pig
n=15 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 5- Sheep
n=16 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 6- Llama
n=10 Participants
Clinic-based visit, usual care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 7- Cat
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 8- Dog
n=17 Participants
Clinic-based visit, technology-enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 9- Donkey
n=13 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 10- Bear
n=15 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 11- Tiger
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 12- Lion
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology enhanced care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and structured visits
|
Group 13- Monkey
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 14- Zebra
n=12 Participants
Clinic and community visits, usual care coordination, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 15- Elephant
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, standard pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
Group 16- Giraffe
n=14 Participants
Clinic and community visits, technology-enhanced care, enhanced pediatric surveillance, and individually-tailored visits
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Parental Attitudes Toward Psychological Services Inventory (PATPSI)
|
-1.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.0
|
1.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.9
|
5.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.9
|
0.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.3
|
1.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.3
|
0.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.1
|
-3.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.1
|
-1.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.2
|
-4.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.9
|
-0.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.0
|
-3.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.0
|
1.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.1
|
-0.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.1
|
-2.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.0
|
-1.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.5
|
-2.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.8
|
Adverse Events
Group 1- Goat
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 2- Cow
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 3- Horse
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 4- Pig
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 5- Sheep
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 6- Llama
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 7- Cat
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 8- Dog
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 9- Donkey
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 10- Bear
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 11- Tiger
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 12- Lion
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 13- Monkey
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 14- Zebra
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 15- Elephant
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Group 16- Giraffe
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Emily Feinberg, ScD, CPNP
Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Public Health
Phone: 617-414-1425
Email: [email protected]
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place