TABLE 1

Individual Study Characteristics

First Author, YearInterventionParticipants Sample Size (n)Outcomes Relevant to Review (Assessment Used)Evaluation PeriodFindings
DescriptionMode of DeliveryNumber and Length of Sessions for StudyParental CharacteristicsChild’s AgeParentalChild
Casey 1980,36 Whitt 198237Well-child visits scheduled at 2, 4, 8, 15, 21, and 27 wk; discussions at all visits designed to enhance mother-infant interaction and stimulate infants’ cognitive developmentPediatrician6 sessions; 25–30 min in lengthFirst-time mothers with low incomes (47)Newborn1. Mother-infant interactionsInfant DevelopmentBefore 27-wk visitParental Outcome:
(1. Observational assessment that was scored based on Ainsworth Scales(1. Bayley Mental Scales of Infant Development [MDI],1. Mean global score and 4 subscales (Interaction Appropriateness, Cooperation-Interference, Appropriateness of Play, and Sensitivity-Insensitivity) showed significant differences between control and experimental groups (P < .05); 2 subscales (Interaction Appropriateness and Sensitivity-Insensitivity) remained significant with no contact group (ie, different pediatrician; P < .05)
2. Observational assessment of infant behavior that initiated a maternal behavioral response or vice versa)2. Ordinal Scales of Psychological Development)2. No significant group differences in individual maternal responsive behaviors or overall occurrence of responsive behaviors
Child Outcome:
No significant differences between intervention and control groups in Bayley MDI; Vocal Imitation scale of the Ordinal Scales of Psychological Development showed significant differences between intervention and no-contact group (ie, different pediatrician, P < .01)
High 200038ROR: Children 6 mo to 5 y receive the following by pediatrician: age-appropriate book, educational handout explaining benefits of books; and literacy promoting anticipatory guidancePediatricianChildren 5–11 mo received intervention at 3 well-child visits; length of session not given in studyMothers and fathers (205)5–11 mo1. No. of d/wk reading with childLanguage (MacArthur Communication and Development Inventories-Short Form)One month after child had completed 3 well-child visits or 22 mo of age (if child did not complete 3 well-child visits)Parental Outcomes:
2. No. of nights/wk shared books at bedtime1. Intervention group reported reading more d/wk (P < .001) and reported a greater change in the number of days reading a book/wk compared with the control group (P < .001)
3. Child Centered Literacy Orientation (CCLO)2. Intervention group reported reading more nights/wk (P = .004) and reported a greater change in the number of nights reading a book/wk compared with the control group (P < .001)
(Considered positive if reading books was mentioned as child or parent’s favorite activity or if families shared books at least 6 nights/wk)3. There was a significant difference in CCLO between intervention group and control group (P = .003)
Child Outcome:
Intervention group with significant positive difference in receptive vocabulary (P = .004) compared with control group; significant expressive vocabulary differences noted in subset of children 18–25-mo-old who received the intervention compared with the control (P = .01)
Golova 199939PediatricianChildren 5–11 mo received intervention at 3 well-child visits; length of session not given in studyHispanic or Spanish-speaking parents (135)5–11 mo1. No. of d/wk parent reads books with childLanguage (MacArthur Communication and Development Inventories-Short Form)Child had completed 2 well-child visits (in addition to enrollment visit)Parental Outcomes:
2. Parental enjoyment of reading1. Odds of parents reporting that they read to their child >3 times/wk was greater in the intervention group than control group (OR 10.1; 95% CI 4.0–25.6; P < .001)
3. No. of children’s books and total books in the home2. Odds of parent reporting that reading was one of favorite activities was greater in the intervention group compared with control group (OR 5.9; 95% CI 42.3–14.9; P < .001)
3. A greater percentage of intervention parents reported having at least 5 books in the home (52% vs 19%; P < .001)
Child Outcomes:
No significant differences found
Jones 200040PediatricianAll well-child visits for children 2–24 mo for a 2-y period; length of session not given in studyMore than 90% of the caregivers were a single parent and living at or near poverty level (352)2–24 moQuestionnaire regarding literacy development and literacy practices in the homeNot assessed2 y after entry into the studyParents who received the intervention were more likely to report that they enjoyed reading together with their child compared with control (38% vs 19%; P < .05)
Dworkin 198741Use of age-specific discussions of affective, cognitive, and physical development during 2-wk through 6-mo well-child visitsPediatrician4 sessions 20–25 min in lengthMothers; Most families headed by single-parent households (128)NewbornMaternal-infant interactionNot assessedFollowing 6-mo visitNo significant differences on observational measure; on qualitative measure, mothers in the intervention group received higher ratings for physical involvement and closeness (P = .035)
(1. Observational assessment based on Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment and Infant Social Behavior Manual
2. Qualitative measure that includes ratings of maternal sensitivity and responsiveness, physical involvement and closeness, and reciprocal positive affect between mother and child)
Taylor 1997,42 199843Group well-child visits scheduled with other mothers and children; at each visit, topics developed to improve maternal-child interaction and development are discussedNurse practitioners7 group well-child visits scheduled at 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 15 mo; each session lasted between 45 and 60 minMothers who reported one of the following: poverty, single marital status, education less than high school, age <20, previous substance abuse, or a history of abuse as a child (n = 220)0–4 mo old1. Maternal-infant interactionsCognitive and Motor Development (Bayley MDI and Psychomotor Index)When child reached 15 mo of ageParental Outcomes:
(1. Nursing Child Assessment Teaching Scale1. No significant differences found between groups
2. Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment)2. No significant differences found between groups
Child Outcomes:
No significant differences found between groups
Mendelsohn 200744VIP: 15 sessions taking place primarily on well-child appointments from 2 wk to 3 y of age where interactions are videotaped between a caregiver and her child and discussed with a child developmental specialist; parents provided with learning materials and written pamphletsChild developmental specialist30–45-min sessions that coincide with well-child visits from 2 wk until age of assessment (33 mo)Hispanic or Latina mothers, Mothers had education less than high school (150)Newborn1. Parent-child interactions (StimQ questionnaire)1. Cognitive developmentChild 33 moParental Outcomes:
(Bayley Scales of Infant Development)1. Significant difference in 1 of the 4 subscales of the StimQ: Parental Involvement in Developmental Advancement (P = .003); no significant difference in total score
2. Language DevelopmentChild Outcomes:
(Preschool Language Scale-3)1. Intervention group had a greater percentage of children with normal cognitive scores (63.5% vs 44.4%, P < .05)
3. Social-emotional/ behavioral development2. No significant differences
(Child Behavior Checklist [CBCL])3. No significant differences
Mendelsohn 2011454 visits lasting 30–45 min, which coincide with well-child visits in first 6 moNearly 90% of the sample described as Hispanic or LatinaNewborn1. Parent-child interactions (StimQ questionnaire)Not assessedWhen child 6 mo of age1. Parents who received the intervention had improved parent-child interactions with significant differences in each of 4 subscales of StimQ and total score (P < .01)
>85% of sample described as having low SES (675)2. Reading Diary2. Parents who received the intervention spent more time reading (P = .02) and more instances reading (P = .001)
Minkovitz 200146Extended developmental services that occur with well-child visits combined with limited number of home visitsDevelopmental specialists (early childhood educator, nurse, nurse practitioner, social worker, or other professional)Sessions coincide with well-child visits that occurred from enrollment to age of assessment; length of session not given in studyMothers and fathers (2235 randomized; 3330 QE)Infants up to 4 wkParenting practices that promote child developmentNot AssessedWhen infant between 8 and 18 wk of age1. In the families at randomization sites, a higher percentage of families who received the intervention reported showing picture books at least once a day compared with the control group (28% vs 26.4%, P ≤ .05)
(1. Showing picture books to infant at least once a day; 2. Following routines at bedtime, nap time, or meal time; 3. Playing with infant at least once a day)2. In the families at QE sites, more families who received the intervention reported playing with their infant at least once a day (91.8% vs 87.1%, P ≤ .01)
Minkovitz 200347Sessions coincide with well-child visits that occurred from enrollment to age of assessment; length of session not given in studyParenting practices that promote child development:Concern about child’s behavior (CBCL)When child 30–33 mo of ageParental Outcomes:
(1. Reading to child or showing the child picture books; 2. Following routines at naptime, mealtime, and bedtime; 3. Playing with child at least once a day)In the families at QE sites, more families who received the intervention reported following routines (66.0% vs 60.4%, P < .01)
NS for families at randomization sites
Child Outcomes:
No significant differences
Minkovitz 200748Sessions coincide with well-child visits that occurred from enrollment to 3 y of age; length of session not given in studyParenting practices that promote child development: (1. Follow routines; 2. Child looked at or read books)1. Concern about child’s developmentWhen children 5.0–5.5 y of ageParental Outcomes:
(Parents’ Evaluation of Developmental Status)1. In the families at QE sites, more families who received the intervention reported following routines (89.4% vs 84.7%, P < .01) and looking at/reading books in the past week (59.4% vs 51.2%, P < .001); NS for families at randomization sites
2. Concern about child’s behavior (CBCL)Child Outcomes:
3. Child’s Social Skills (Social Skills Rating System)1. No significant differences
2. In the families at QE sites, there was a greater clinical/borderline concern regarding child’s behavior in those families who received the intervention (16.8% vs 13.4%, P = .05); NS for families at randomization sites
3. No significant differences
  • NS, not significant; SES, socioeconomic status.