CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Attachment and Relationship DynamicsCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsIntimate Partner and Family Violence

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Implementation Study of Relationship Checkups as Home Visitations for Low‐Income At‐Risk Couples

Coop Gordon, Kristina, Cordova, James V., Roberson, Patricia N. E., Miller, Melanie, Gray, Tatiana, Lenger, Katherine A., Hawrilenko, Matt, Martin, Kerri·2019·Family Process
DOI 10.1111/famp.12396
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Couples with the greatest need for relationship health maintenance and intervention are often least able to afford and access it; therefore, accessible, affordable, effective, and brief interventions are needed to improve relationship health for those who need it most. Consequently, this paper examined whether a brief relationship intervention could be effectively implemented with a low‐income, underserved population. All enrolled participants (N = 1,312) received the Relationship Checkup, which consists of an assessment and a feedback session delivered in their homes or at a local clinic at their request. Measures assessed relationship satisfaction, communication, psychological and physical aggression, and intimacy at baseline and 1‐month follow‐up, and program and relationship satisfaction at 6‐month follow‐up. All participants reported significant improvements on all outcomes with small effect sizes. However, moderation analyses suggested that distressed couples reported significantly larger effects across the board. Overall, participants reported that they were highly satisfied with the intervention both immediately after its delivery and 6 months later. Findings provide preliminary support for the effectiveness of this brief checkup and point to the utility of offering these kinds of low‐cost brief interventions in flexible formats for those who might have the most difficulty accessing them.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/famp.12396

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 10.1037/0022-006X.60.3.402 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Coop Gordon, K., Cordova, J. V., Roberson, P. N. E., Miller, M., Gray, T., Lenger, K. A., Hawrilenko, M., & Martin, K.
Affiliations
  • Psychology Department University of Tennessee Knoxville TN
  • Francis L. Hiatt Department of Psychology Clark University Worcester MA
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
  • Clark University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Family Process
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-10-11
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
247-265
ISSN
  • 0014-7370 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-5300
DOI
10.1111/famp.12396
OpenAlex
W2896631869
Cited by
39
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Family Process (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Clark Digital Commons (Clark University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • Administration for Children and Families
  • Office of Family Assistance (#90FM0022)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
Keywords
home visits, at-risk couples, low-income couples, relationship satisfaction, couple communication, psychological aggression, physical aggression, intimacy, relationship distress, intervention implementation, underserved populations
MeSH terms
Adult, Communication, Female, Health Plan Implementation, House Calls, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Poverty, Psychotherapy, Brief, Sexual Partners, Patient Satisfaction, Couples Therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review