Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of Group Triple P with Chinese parents on parenting and child outcomes as well as outcomes relating to child academic learning in Mainland China. Participants were 81 Chinese parents and their children in Shanghai, who were randomly allocated to an intervention group or wait-list control group. Parents in the intervention condition received Group Triple P training, and parents and children were assessed at three/two time points. Compared with the control group, parents in the intervention group reported significant improvements in child adjustment problems, parenting practices, parental adjustment, and parenting self-efficacy at post- assessment. Moreover, there was a significant increase in parents’ satisfaction with children’s academic achievement and a reduction in children’s academic problem behaviors at post-intervention. All these effects were maintained at 6-month follow-up. There was also a significant increase in the child report of positive parenting at post-intervention.
Full
Article
ERCT Criteria Breakdown
-
Level 1 Criteria
-
C
Class-level RCT
- Randomisation was at the parent (individual) level, not at the class level.
- "Eligible parents were randomly assigned by an independent person ... to one of the two groups: intervention group or wait-list control group." (p. 11)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Eligible parents were randomly assigned by an independent person who was not involved in the study at any stage to one of the two groups: intervention group or wait-list control group." (p. 11)
Detailed Analysis:
Randomisation was carried out at the individual parent level rather than at the class or school level. Participants were randomly allocated by number generator, indicating parent-level randomisation. ERCT C requires randomising by entire class or higher unit unless tutoring; this design does not meet that.
Final sentence explaining the criterion C is not met because randomisation occurred at the individual level rather than by entire classes.
-
E
Exam-based Assessment
- The study used custom and adapted questionnaires rather than standardised exams.
- "Parenting in Child’s Academic Context Questionnaire ... Academic Problem Behavior Questionnaire ..." (Methods)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Parent measures ... The Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales (PAFAS, Sanders, Morawska, Haslam, Filus, & Fletcher, 2014) ... The Child Adjustment and Parent Efficacy Scale (CAPES; Morawska, Sanders, Haslam, Filus, & Fletcher, 2014) ... Parenting in Child’s Academic Context Questionnaire ... Academic Problem Behavior Questionnaire ..." (various pp.)
Detailed Analysis:
The study used multiple custom and adapted questionnaires developed or adapted by the authors, with no standardised or widely recognised exam-based assessment. All outcome measures were bespoke, failing the ERCT E criterion.
Final sentence explaining criterion E is not met because only custom questionnaires were used instead of standardised exams.
-
T
Term Duration
- A six‑month follow‑up assessment provided outcome measurement after at least one full academic term.
- "Intervention group parents and their children were also asked to complete the questionnaires 6 months after intervention." (p. 11)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Intervention group parents and their children were also asked to complete the questionnaires 6 months after intervention." (p. 11)
Detailed Analysis:
While immediate post‑intervention measures occurred at program end, a 6‑month follow‑up provided outcome data after more than one academic term (~9–10 months). This satisfies ERCT T requiring measurement at least one full term after intervention start.
Final sentence explaining criterion T is met because outcomes were measured at a six‑month follow‑up, exceeding one term duration.
-
D
Documented Control Group
- The wait‑list control group is described with detailed demographics and conditions.
- "Table 1 shows demographic characteristics of parents in the intervention and wait‑list groups." (p. 6)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Table 1 shows demographic characteristics of parents in the intervention and wait‑list groups." (p. 6)
2) "Parents in the wait‑list control group received Group Triple P after they completed post‑assessment." (p. 6)
Detailed Analysis:
The paper provides clear documentation of the control (wait‑list) group, including sample size, demographic characteristics, and their treatment conditions (no intervention until post‑assessment). This meets ERCT D.
Final sentence explaining criterion D is met because the control group is fully documented in demographics and conditions.
-
Level 2 Criteria
-
S
School-level RCT
- Randomisation occurred at the individual level, with no schools assigned as units.
- "Eligible parents were randomly assigned by an independent person..." (p. 11)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Eligible parents were randomly assigned by an independent person..." (p. 11)
Detailed Analysis:
Randomisation was at individual parent level; no school‑level assignment is described. ERCT S requires school‑level RCT, so this is not met.
Final sentence explaining criterion S is not met because randomisation did not occur at the school level.
-
I
Independent Conduct
- The authors who designed the program also delivered and assessed it without independent evaluation.
- "all group sessions and telephone consultations were conducted by the first author ..." (p. 12)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "In this study, all group sessions and telephone consultations were conducted by the first author ... who was a PhD candidate ... and a Group Triple P accredited practitioner." (p. 12)
2) "The practitioner was supervised by the second author ... experienced Triple P practitioner ..." (p. 12)
Detailed Analysis:
The intervention delivery and assessment were performed by the paper’s authors themselves. No independent third‑party evaluator was involved, failing ERCT I.
Final sentence explaining criterion I is not met because the same team designed and evaluated the program.
-
Y
Year Duration
- Follow‑up lasted six months, shorter than the full academic year required.
- "Intervention group parents and their children were also asked to complete the questionnaires 6 months after intervention." (p. 11)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Intervention group parents and their children were also asked to complete the questionnaires 6 months after intervention." (p. 11)
Detailed Analysis:
Follow‑up lasted six months, which is less than a full academic year (~9–10 months). No year‑long tracking is reported, so ERCT Y is not met.
Final sentence explaining criterion Y is not met because tracking did not extend to a full academic year.
-
B
Balanced Resources
-
Level 3 Criteria
-
R
Reproduced Results
-
A
All Exams
- Academic outcomes were measured by custom questionnaires, not in all main subjects via standardised exams.
- "Parenting in Child’s Academic Context Questionnaire ..." (Methods)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "Parenting in Child’s Academic Context Questionnaire ..." (Methods)
Detailed Analysis:
Academic outcomes were measured only by custom questionnaires, not via standardised exams across all main subjects. ERCT A is not met.
Final sentence explaining criterion A is not met because only bespoke academic questionnaires were used, not all‑subject exam assessments.
-
G
Graduation Tracking
-
P
Pre-Registered Protocol
- The study was registered after the trial began (ACTRN12613000660785), so it was not truly pre‑registered.
- "The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12613000660785)." (p. 11)
Relevant Quotes:
1) "The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12613000660785)." (p. 11)
Detailed Analysis:
The trial was registered with the ANZCTR (ACTRN12613000660785) after it commenced, rather than before data collection. ERCT P requires pre‑registration, a condition not met in this case.
Final sentence explaining criterion P is not met because the study was not registered prior to data collection.
Request an Update or Contact Us
Are you the author of this study? Let us know if you have any questions or updates.
