Cited by 91Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceChild Welfare and AdoptionChild Abuse and Trauma

The prevention of child maltreatment through the nurse family partnership program: Mediating effects in a long-term follow-up study

Abstract

We examine maternal life-course mediators of the impact of a nurse home visitation program on reducing child maltreatment among participants in the Elmira trial of the Nurse Family Partnership program from the first child’s birth through age 15. For women having experienced low to moderate levels of domestic violence, program effects on the number of confirmed maltreatment reports were mediated by reductions in numbers of subsequent children born to mothers and their reported use of public assistance. Together, the two mediators explained nearly one half of the total effect of nurse home visiting on child maltreatment. The long-term success of this program on reducing child maltreatment can be explained, at least in part, by its positive effect on pregnancy planning and economic self-sufficiency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1077559516685185

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • A follow-up mediation analysis underscored the stabilizing role of enhanced family planning and improved income through public assistance in the relationship between the Nurse-Family Partnership and reduced rates of child maltreatment.

    “A follow-up mediation analysis on the relationship between the intervention and reduced rates of child maltreatment underscored the stabilizing role of enhanced family planning and improved income through public assistance.69”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 52 · Cited by 91

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Bandura A., 1997, Self-efficacy, the exercise of control
  2. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.2307/1129836 · DOI
  4. 10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.413 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.004 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.04.004 · DOI
  7. 10.1080/00332747.1993.11024624 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.06.011 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2003.08.007 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.07.007 · DOI
  11. 10.1001/jama.284.11.1385 · DOI
  12. 10.1542/peds.2005-0948 · DOI
  13. 10.1542/peds.2005-1517 · DOI
  14. 10.1017/CBO9780511752810 · DOI
  15. 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61706-7 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Gomby D., 2005, Home visitation in 2005: Outcomes for children and parents
  17. 10.2307/1602719 · DOI
  18. 10.1353/foc.0.0032 · DOI
  19. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2014, New directions in child abuse and neglect research
  20. 10.1001/jama.1997.03550080054039 · DOI
  21. 10.1001/jama.283.15.1983 · DOI
  22. 10.1177/0193841X9301700202 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61708-0 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.2307/2135939 · DOI
  25. 10.1007/s11121-015-0572-9 · DOI
  26. Muthen L. K., 1998, Mplus users guide
  27. 10.1001/jama.1997.03550080047038 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Olds D. L., 1986, Pediatrics, 78, 65, 10.1542/peds.78.1.65 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1001/jama.280.14.1238 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Olds D. L., 1994, Pediatrics, 93, 89, 10.1542/peds.93.1.89 · DOI
  31. 10.2105/AJPH.78.11.1436 · DOI
  32. 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(199701)25:1<9::AID-JCOP2>3.0.CO;2-V · DOI
  33. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01702.x · DOI · Paper page
  34. Paulsell D., 2010, Home visiting evidence of effectiveness review: Executive summary
  35. 10.1080/00273170701341316 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2003.11.001 · DOI
  38. 10.1007/s11121-015-0611-6 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.03.004 · DOI
  40. Sedlak A. J., 2010, Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS–4): Report to Congress, Executive Summary
  41. 10.1037/0012-1649.29.2.368 · DOI
  42. 10.2307/351733 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00750.x · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.04.019 · DOI
  45. 10.3758/s13428-011-0076-x · DOI · Paper page
  46. 10.2307/1602723 · DOI
  47. 10.1017/S0954579409000248 · DOI

Authors
Eckenrode, J., Campa, M. I., Morris, P. A., Henderson, C. R., Bolger, K. E., Kitzman, H., & Olds, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • University of Colorado Denver (US)
Corresponding author
Eckenrode, John
Venue
Child Maltreatment
Published
2016-12-29
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
92-99
ISSN
  • 1077-5595 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6119
OpenAlex
W2606569623
Cited by
91
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11
FWCI
9.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Child Maltreatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
Nurse-Family Partnership, child abuse prevention, nurse home visiting, mediation analysis, domestic violence, pregnancy planning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Abuse, Child, Preschool, Female, Follow-Up Studies, House Calls, Humans, Infant, Public Assistance, Program Evaluation, Domestic Violence, Family Nursing

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