The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The clinical effectiveness of different parenting programmes for children with conduct problems: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
Background: Conduct problems are common, disabling and costly. The prognosis for children with conduct problems is poor, with outcomes in adulthood including criminal behaviour, alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, child abuse and a range of psychiatric disorders. There has been a rapid expansion of group based parent-training programmes for the treatment of children with conduct problems in a number of countries over the past 10 years. Existing reviews of parent training have methodological limitations such as inclusion of non-randomised studies, the absence of investigation for heterogeneity prior to meta-analysis or failure to report confidence intervals. The objective of the current study was to systematically review randomised controlled trials of parenting programmes for the treatment of children with conduct problems. Methods: Standard systematic review methods were followed including duplicate inclusion decisions, data extraction and quality assessment. Twenty electronic databases from the fields of medicine, psychology, social science and education were comprehensively searched for RCTs and systematic reviews to February 2006. Inclusion criteria were: randomised controlled trial; of structured, repeatable parenting programmes; for parents/carers of children up to the age of 18 with a conduct problem; and at least one measure of child behaviour. Meta-analysis and qualitative synthesis were used to summarise included studies. Results: 57 RCTs were included. Studies were small with an average group size of 21. Meta-analyses using both parent (SMD -0.67; 95% CI: -0.91, -0.42) and independent (SMD -0.44; 95% CI: -0.66, -0.23) reports of outcome showed significant differences favouring the intervention group. There was insufficient evidence to determine the relative effectiveness of different approaches to delivering parenting programmes. Conclusion: Parenting programmes are an effective treatment for children with conduct problems. The relative effectiveness of different parenting programmes requires further research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
Higgins, J. P. T., Green, S., & Ben Van Den, A. (2020) · International Coaching Psychology Review · doi:10.53841/bpsicpr.2020.15.2.123 · Cited by 5,670
Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5 · Cited by 4,826
A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior
Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (1989) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.44.2.329 · Cited by 2,048
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder
Ellsworth, P. D. (1980) · The American Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.5014/ajot.34.12.819a · Cited by 1,700
Mental health of children and adolescents in Great Britain
Meltzer, H., Gatward, R., Goodman, R., & Ford, T. (2003) · International Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/0954026021000046155 · Cited by 1,214
A meta-analysis of parent training: Moderators and follow-up effects
Lundahl, B., Risser, H. J., & Lovejoy, M. C. (2006) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2005.07.004 · Cited by 1,072
Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond, M. (1997) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.65.1.93 · Cited by 1,029
Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Dickson, N., Silva, P., & Stanton, W. (1996) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579400007161 · Cited by 965
Financial cost of social exclusion: follow up study of antisocial children into adulthood
Scott, S., Knapp, M., Henderson, J., & Maughan, B. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7306.191 · Cited by 906
Sanders, M. R., Markie-Dadds, C., Tully, L. A., & Bor, W. (2000) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-006x.68.4.624 · Cited by 905
Cited by
Development, Evaluation, and Multinational Dissemination of the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program
Sanders, M. R. (2012) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143104 · Cited by 607
Bearss, K., Johnson, C., Smith, T., Lecavalier, L., Swiezy, N., Aman, M., McAdam, D. B., Butter, E., Stillitano, C., Minshawi, N., et al. (2015) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3150 · Cited by 454
Furlong, M., McGilloway, S., Bywater, T., Hutchings, J., Smith, S. M., & Donnelly, M. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd008225.pub2 · Cited by 454
Havighurst, S. S., Wilson, K. R., Harley, A. E., Prior, M. R., & Kehoe, C. (2010) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02303.x · Cited by 287
Barlow, J., Bergman, H., Kornør, H., Wei, Y., & Bennett, C. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003680.pub3 · Cited by 268
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dretzke, J., Davenport, C., Frew, E., Barlow, J., Stewart-Brown, S., Bayliss, S., Taylor, R. S., Sandercock, J., & Hyde, C.
- Venue
- Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
- Published
- 2009-03-04
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 7-7
- ISSN
- 1753-2000 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2072258456
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 59
- FWCI
- 2.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The clinical effectiveness of different parenting programmes for children with conduct problems: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1753-2000-3-7
- The paper
- Dretzke, J., Davenport, C., Frew, E., Barlow, J., Stewart-Brown, S., Bayliss, S., Taylor, R. S., Sandercock, J., & Hyde, C. (2009). The clinical effectiveness of different parenting programmes for children with conduct problems: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/1753-2000-3-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
