Back

Infant Mental Health Prevention and Treatment: A Systematic Review Examining the Role of Homelessness

Landis, T. D.; Hare, M. M.; Graziano, P.

2020-12-11 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2020.12.09.20246553 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeWhereas many prevention and treatment programs exist for children and families, there have been no reviews specifically examining infant mental health outcomes. Furthermore, despite high rates of infants and families experiencing homelessness, little work has evaluated the effectiveness of these parenting programs in such vulnerable populations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to a) systematically examine prevention and treatment parenting programs targeting infant mental health outcomes in infants from birth to age 2 years, b) highlight strengths and limitations of current interventions, and c) identify gaps in the existing literature to inform future mental health intervention science in areas of greatest need, specifically within the context of homelessness. MethodsFrom over 15,000 publications initially identified, thirty-three prevention and treatment programs met inclusion criteria for this review. Each program was reviewed for level of scientific evidence. ResultsOf the thirty-three programs reviewed, eleven (33%) were classified as promising. An additional 18% were classified as ineffective, emerging, and effective. Lastly, only four programs (12%; Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up, Parent-Child Interaction Therapy, Triple P-Positive Parenting Program, and Video-feedback Intervention Parenting Program) were classified as evidence-based based on infant mental health outcomes. Few of the identified programs have been implemented in homeless shelters, with no randomized control trials to date. ConclusionsThere is a dearth of literature examining programs targeting infant mental health. Even those programs considered evidence-based have not been thoroughly examined among families in shelter settings.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.