Trial Outcomes & Findings for Implementation of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Policy (NCT NCT04916587)

NCT ID: NCT04916587

Last Updated: 2025-07-20

Results Overview

The number of participants with ACEs screenings.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

NA

Target enrollment

7645 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

Every 10 weeks during the study trial, up to 19 months

Results posted on

2025-07-20

Participant Flow

Unit of analysis: Clinics

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Practice 1
This clinic was part of the study trial based on the seven extended 10-week periods in the Stepped Wedge schedule. Clinic 1: Baseline/Control for 10 weeks, followed by six intervention periods of 60 weeks total.
Practice 2
This clinic was part of the study trial based on the seven extended 10-week periods in the Stepped Wedge schedule. Clinic 2: Baseline/Control for 20 weeks, followed by intervention period of 50 weeks total.
Practice 3
This clinic was part of the study trial based on the seven extended 10-week periods in the Stepped Wedge schedule. Clinic 3: Baseline/Control for 30 weeks, followed by intervention period of 40 weeks total.
Practice 4
This practice is a comparison group that did not receive the intervention throughout the study period.
Practice 5
This is a comparison group that did not received the intervention
Step 1: Months 1-2.3
STARTED
248 1
587 1
56 1
351 1
97 1
Step 1: Months 1-2.3
COMPLETED
248 1
587 1
56 1
351 1
97 1
Step 1: Months 1-2.3
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step 2: Months 2.3 - 4.6
STARTED
367 1
604 1
74 1
416 1
151 1
Step 2: Months 2.3 - 4.6
COMPLETED
367 1
604 1
74 1
416 1
151 1
Step 2: Months 2.3 - 4.6
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step 3: Months 4.6 - 6.9
STARTED
312 1
470 1
88 1
322 1
13 1
Step 3: Months 4.6 - 6.9
COMPLETED
312 1
470 1
88 1
322 1
13 1
Step 3: Months 4.6 - 6.9
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step 4: Months 6.9 - 9.2
STARTED
189 1
354 1
75 1
89 1
0 0
Step 4: Months 6.9 - 9.2
COMPLETED
189 1
354 1
75 1
89 1
0 0
Step 4: Months 6.9 - 9.2
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step 5: Months 9.2 - 11.5
STARTED
238 1
448 1
100 1
209 1
0 0
Step 5: Months 9.2 - 11.5
COMPLETED
238 1
448 1
100 1
209 1
0 0
Step 5: Months 9.2 - 11.5
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step 6: Months 11.5 - 13.8
STARTED
260 1
465 1
97 1
104 1
0 0
Step 6: Months 11.5 - 13.8
COMPLETED
260 1
465 1
97 1
104 1
0 0
Step 6: Months 11.5 - 13.8
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step 7: Months 13.8 - 16.1
STARTED
227 1
470 1
106 1
58 1
0 0
Step 7: Months 13.8 - 16.1
COMPLETED
227 1
470 1
106 1
58 1
0 0
Step 7: Months 13.8 - 16.1
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

Reasons for withdrawal

Withdrawal data not reported

Baseline Characteristics

Implementation of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Policy

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Control
n=1657 Participants
Clinics without implementing the strategy supporting ACEs screening.
Interventions
n=4178 Participants
Clinics started the ACEs screening and the implementation strategy.
Comparison Clinics
n=1810 Participants
Clinic starting ACEs screening without the implementation strategy
Total
n=7645 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
1657 Participants
n=5 Participants
4178 Participants
n=7 Participants
1810 Participants
n=5 Participants
7645 Participants
n=4 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
NA Participants
n=5 Participants
NA Participants
n=7 Participants
NA Participants
n=5 Participants
NA Participants
n=4 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
NA Participants
n=5 Participants
NA Participants
n=7 Participants
NA Participants
n=5 Participants
NA Participants
n=4 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
788 Participants
n=5 Participants
2018 Participants
n=7 Participants
901 Participants
n=5 Participants
3707 Participants
n=4 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
869 Participants
n=5 Participants
2160 Participants
n=7 Participants
909 Participants
n=5 Participants
3938 Participants
n=4 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
63 Participants
n=5 Participants
219 Participants
n=7 Participants
114 Participants
n=5 Participants
396 Participants
n=4 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
774 Participants
n=5 Participants
1719 Participants
n=7 Participants
718 Participants
n=5 Participants
3211 Participants
n=4 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
820 Participants
n=5 Participants
2240 Participants
n=7 Participants
978 Participants
n=5 Participants
4038 Participants
n=4 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
774 Participants
n=5 Participants
1719 Participants
n=7 Participants
718 Participants
n=5 Participants
3211 Participants
n=4 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
63 Participants
n=5 Participants
219 Participants
n=7 Participants
114 Participants
n=5 Participants
396 Participants
n=4 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other / Unknown
820 Participants
n=5 Participants
2240 Participants
n=7 Participants
978 Participants
n=5 Participants
4038 Participants
n=4 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
1657 participants
n=5 Participants
4178 participants
n=7 Participants
1810 participants
n=5 Participants
7645 participants
n=4 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Every 10 weeks during the study trial, up to 19 months

Population: Children ages 0 - 5 years old attending the annual check-up visit at the clinic

The number of participants with ACEs screenings.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Control
n=1657 Participants
Clinics without implementing the strategy supporting ACEs screening.
Interventions
n=4178 Participants
Clinics started the ACEs screening and the implementation strategy.
Comparison Clinics
n=1810 Participants
Clinic starting ACEs screening without the implementation strategy
ACEs Screenings Reach
0 Participants
468 Participants
73 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Every 10 weeks during the study trial, up to 19 months.

Population: Children ages 0 - 5 years old attending the annual check-up visit at the clinic

Number of participants with a mental health referral (behavioral analysis, behavioral health, care coordinator, care management, child development/development center or social work)

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Control
n=1657 Participants
Clinics without implementing the strategy supporting ACEs screening.
Interventions
n=4158 Participants
Clinics started the ACEs screening and the implementation strategy.
Comparison Clinics
n=1810 Participants
Clinic starting ACEs screening without the implementation strategy
Mental Health Service Referral
6 Participants
302 Participants
4 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: First score measure during ACEs screenings. Follow-up scores from 8 - 16 months

Population: The PSC data was collected for a subset of the total sample. A group of caregivers reported on PSC scores during ACEs screenings (n=414). From that group, a total of 50 caregivers were randomly selected for follow-up to assess PSC scores after the screenings (n=50)

The percentage of children screening positive for BPSS or PPSC from the time of the ACEs screening. These data were collected on a subsample of study participants during ACEs screenings (n=414). From that group, a total of 50 caregivers provided follow up information on PSC scores (n=50). This secondary outcome was collected as part of the strategy in the intervention group only (i.e., ACEs screenings plus the multifaceted implementation strategy group). The data were only collected from the "ACEs Screenings and a Multifaceted Implementation Strategy" Arm/Group.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Control
n=414 Participants
Clinics without implementing the strategy supporting ACEs screening.
Interventions
n=50 Participants
Clinics started the ACEs screening and the implementation strategy.
Comparison Clinics
Clinic starting ACEs screening without the implementation strategy
Changes in Baby Pediatric Symptoms (BPSS) / Preschool PSC (PPSC)
111 Participants
6 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: End of data collection -End of period 7 in the stepped-wedge schedule

Population: Children ages 0 - 5 years old attending the annual check-up visit at the clinic

Self-reported 4-item instrument to evaluate acceptability of ACEs policy and implementation efforts. 5-pt Likert scale; average score of 4+ shows acceptability. Good internal consistency (α=0.83). Test-retest reliability r=0.83. At the end of the stepped-wedge schedule, clinical personnel were invited to participate in a survey to evaluate the acceptability of the strategy. These data were collected on a subsample of clinic personnel involved in the implementation of the ACEs screenings at the study clinical sites. This self-reported 4-item instrument to evaluate acceptability used a 5-point Likert scale for each item, ranging from 1 (Completely Disagree) to 5 (Completely Agree). The total score is calculated by summing the responses across all four items, which range from 4 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater acceptability.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Control
Clinics without implementing the strategy supporting ACEs screening.
Interventions
n=10 Participants
Clinics started the ACEs screening and the implementation strategy.
Comparison Clinics
Clinic starting ACEs screening without the implementation strategy
Acceptability of the Strategy
2.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.90

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: End of data collection- End of Period 7 based on the Stepped-Wedge Schedule

Population: Children ages 0 - 5 years old attending the annual check-up visit at the clinic

Self-reported 4-item instrument to evaluate the feasibility of implementation efforts. 5-pt Likert scale; average score of 4+ shows ACEs policy and implementation strategy perceived as feasible. Good internal consistency (α=0.89). Test-retest reliability r=0.88. At the end of the stepped-wedge schedule, clinical personnel were invited to participate in a survey to evaluate the feasibility of the strategy. These data were collected on a subsample of clinic personnel involved in the implementation of the ACEs screenings at the study clinical sites. This self-reported 4-item instrument to evaluate feasibility used a 5-point Likert scale for each item, ranging from 1 (Completely Disagree) to 5 (Completely Agree). The total score is calculated by summing the responses across all four items, which range from 4 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater feasibility.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Control
Clinics without implementing the strategy supporting ACEs screening.
Interventions
n=10 Participants
Clinics started the ACEs screening and the implementation strategy.
Comparison Clinics
Clinic starting ACEs screening without the implementation strategy
Feasibility of the Strategy
2.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.92

Adverse Events

Intervention Group: ACEs Screenings and a Multifaceted Implementation Strategy

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Control Group: Standard Care

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Comparison Group

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

Dr. Monica Perez Jolles

University of Colorado, Denver

Phone: 303-724-0829

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place