Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Clinical Research Article
  • Published:

Supporting responsive parenting in real-world implementation: minimal effective dose of the Video Interaction Project

Pediatric Research volume 95, pages 1295–1300 (2024)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

The Video Interaction Project (VIP) is a healthcare-based intervention that provides real-time video-feedback of parent-child play and reading interactions to families with children aged 0 to 36 months. Although evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrates improved early relational health, including responsive parenting, after three to five VIP visits, the minimal effective dose in real-world implementations is unknown. This study aimed to determine the minimal effective dose of VIP during a real-world implementation for changing responsive parenting behaviors.

Methods

We performed a longitudinal prospective study of 183 dyads at a public hospital pediatric clinic. Responsive parenting behaviors were assessed with an observational checklist utilized as part of standard VIP practice at baseline and two follow-up VIP visits.

Results

Multilevel models adjusted for baseline sociodemographics (child’s sex and age, and maternal education) and time between visits showed that responsive parenting behaviors during parent-child reading and play significantly increased after a single VIP visit (Cohen’s d = 0.52, p < 0.05) with additional impact following completion of a second visit (cumulative for 2 visits: d = 0.76, p < 0.05).

Conclusions

A single VIP visit is associated with increased responsive parenting behaviors. Findings support offering VIP widely, regardless of capacity to ensure attendance at multiple visits.

Impact

  • This is the first study showing the minimal effective dose of the Video Interaction Project (VIP) for increasing responsive parenting behaviors.

  • Responsive parenting behaviors increased by over 22% following a single VIP visit, with a cumulative increase of 37% following the second visit compared to baseline.

  • Findings have important implications for implementation and scalability of pediatric-based preventive programs that support early relational health through activities such as reading and play.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Adjusted means of number of observed responsive parenting behaviors after first and second VIP follow-up visits.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Garner, A. & Yogman, M. Preventing childhood toxic stress: partnering with families and communities to promote relational health. Pediatrics 148, e2021052582 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wolf, S. & McCoy, D. C. Household socioeconomic status and parental investments: direct and indirect relations with school readiness in Ghana. Child Dev. 90, 260–278 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Masarik, A. S. & Conger, R. D. Stress and child development: a review of the Family Stress Model. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 13, 85–90 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Shaw, D. S., Mendelsohn, A. L. & Morris, P. A. Reducing poverty-related disparities in child development and school readiness: the Smart Beginnings tiered prevention strategy that combines pediatric primary care with home visiting. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 1–15 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-021-00366-0 (2021).

  5. Hagan, J. F., Shaw, J. S. & Duncan, P. M. Evidence and rationale. in Bright Futures: Guidelines for Health Supervision of Infants, Children and Adolescents (eds Hagan, J. F., Shaw, J. S. & Duncan, P. M.) 275–302 (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2017).

  6. Schickedanz, A. & Halfon, N. Evolving roles for health care in supporting healthy child development. Futur. Child 30, 143 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mendelsohn, A. L. et al. The impact of a clinic-based literacy intervention on language development in inner-city preschool children. Pediatrics 107, 130–134 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Needlman, R., Toker, K. H., Dreyer, B. P., Klass, P. & Mendelsohn, A. L. Effectiveness of a primary care intervention to support reading aloud: a multicenter evaluation. Ambul. Pediatr. 5, 209–215 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bethell, C. D., Gombojav, N. & Whitaker, R. C. Family resilience and connection promote flourishing among US children, even amid adversity. Health Aff. (Millwood) 38, 729–737 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Roby, E. et al. Improving parent-child interactions in pediatric health care: A two-site randomized controlled trial. Pediatrics 147, e20201799 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cates, C. B. et al. Enhancing parent talk, reading, and play in primary care: sustained impacts of the Video Interaction Project. J. Pediatr. 199, 49–56.e1 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Cates, C. B. et al. Leveraging healthcare to promote responsive parenting: Impacts of the Video Interaction Project on parenting stress. J. Child Fam. Stud. 25, 827–835 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Canfield, C. F. et al. Encouraging parent–child book sharing: Potential additive benefits of literacy promotion in health care and the community. Early Child. Res. Q 50, 221–229 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Weisleder, A. et al. Links between shared reading and play, parent psychosocial functioning, and child behavior: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. J. Pediatr. 213, 187–195.e1 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Weisleder, A. et al. Promotion of positive parenting and prevention of socioemotional disparities. Pediatrics 137, e20153239 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Roben, C. K. P., Dozier, M., Caron, E. B. & Bernard, K. Moving an evidence-based parenting program into the community. Child Dev. 88, 1447 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Walker, S. P. et al. Implementation of parenting interventions through health services in Jamaica. Vulnerable Child. Youth Stud. 13, 127–141 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sanders, M. R., Turner, K. M. T. & Metzler, C. W. Applying self-regulation principles in the delivery of parenting interventions. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 22, 24–42 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Stallman, H. M. Embedding resilience within the tertiary curriculum: A feasibility study. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 30, 121–133 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith, J. D. et al. Parenting interventions in pediatric primary care: a systematic review. Pediatrics 146, e20193548 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Voils, C. I. et al. Informing the dosing of interventions in randomized trials. Contemp. Clin. Trials 33, 1225 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. NYC Health + Hospitals. Community health needs assessment. Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) https://hhinternet.blob.core.windows.net/uploads/2022/07/community-health-needs-asssessment-2022.pdf (2022).

  23. Mendelsohn, A. L. et al. Video Interaction Project Program Manual. Unpublished manual. (2021).

  24. Hart, B. & Risley, T. T. R. Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children (Paul Brookes Publishing Company, 1995). https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259801900609.

  25. Tomasello, M. & Farrar, M. J. Joint attention and early language. Child Dev. 57, 1454 (1986).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. DeBruin-Parecki, A. Assessing adult/child storybook reading practices (CIERA report, 1999).

  27. Dreyer, B. P., Mendelsohn, A. L. & Tamis-LeMonda, C. S. Assessing the child’s cognitive home environment through parental report; reliability and validity. Early Dev. Parent. 5, 271–287 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Roggman, L. A., Cook, G. A., Innocenti, M. S., Jump Norman, V. & Christiansen, K. Parenting interactions with children: checklist of observations linked to outcomes (PICCOLO) in diverse ethnic groups. Infant Ment. Health J. 34, 290–306 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tamis-LeMonda, C. et al. Caregiver-child affect, responsiveness, and engagement scale (C-CARES). Unpublished manuscript, Department of Applied Psychology, New York University, New York, NY.

  30. Harding, J. F., Morris, P. A. & Hughes, D. The relationship between maternal education and children’s academic outcomes: a theoretical framework. J. Marriage Fam. 77, 60–76 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Miller, E. B. et al. Sociodemographic and psychosocial predictors of VIP attendance in Smart Beginnings through 6 months: effectively targeting at-risk mothers in early visits. Prev. Sci. 21, 120–130 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Routledge, 1988). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587.

  33. Miller, E. B. et al. Promoting cognitive stimulation in parents across infancy and toddlerhood: a randomized clinical trial. J. Pediatr. 255, 159–165.e4 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chavis, A. et al. A brief intervention affects parents’ attitudes toward using less physical punishment. Child Abus. Negl. 37, 1192–1201 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. High, P., Hopmann, M., LaGasse, L. & Linn, H. Evaluation of a clinic-based program to promote book sharing and bedtime routines among low-income urban families with young children. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 152, 459–465 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rikin, S. et al. Factors associated with increased reading frequency in children exposed to Reach Out and Read. Acad. Pediatr. 15, 651–657 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Goodman, W. B., Dodge, K. A., Bai, Y., O’Donnell, K. J. & Murphy, R. A. Randomized controlled trial of family connects: effects on child emergency medical care from birth to 24 months. Dev. Psychopathol. 31, 1863–1872 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Supplee, L., Gardner, F. & Arnds, K. Randomized trial of a family-centered approach to the prevention of early conduct problems: 2-year effects of the family check-up in early childhood. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 74, 1–9 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Baker, S., Sanders, M. R., Turner, K. M. T. & Morawska, A. A randomized controlled trial evaluating a low-intensity interactive online parenting intervention, Triple P Online Brief, with parents of children with early onset conduct problems. Behav. Res. Ther. 91, 78–90 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mendelsohn, A. L. et al. Reading aloud, play, and social-emotional development. Pediatrics 141, e20173393 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the VIP coaches and evaluation team for making the study possible. We are also thankful to the participating families.

Funding

Tiger Foundation. Marks Foundation. New York City Council.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Luciane R. Piccolo, Erin Roby.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

    Luciane R. Piccolo, Erin Roby, Caitlin F. Canfield, Anne M. Seery, Carolyn Brockmeyer Cates, Leonela Tutasig, Maya Matalon, Aida Custode & Alan L. Mendelsohn

  2. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    Adriana Weisleder

  3. Department of Psychology, School of Natural and Social Sciences, Purchase College, State University of New York, Purchase, NY, USA

    Carolyn Brockmeyer Cates

  4. Department of Pediatrics, Woodhull Medical Center Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY, USA

    Luis Rodriguez

Authors
  1. Luciane R. Piccolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erin Roby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Caitlin F. Canfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne M. Seery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Adriana Weisleder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Carolyn Brockmeyer Cates
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Leonela Tutasig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Maya Matalon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Aida Custode
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Luis Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Alan L. Mendelsohn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: L.R.P., E.R., A.M.S., C.F.C., and A.L.M.; draft manuscript preparation: L.R.P., E.R., C.F.C., A.M.S., C.B.C., L.T., and A.L.M.; data collection: C.F.C., A.M.S., A.W., M.M., and A.C.; analysis and interpretation of results: L.R.P., E.R., C.F.C., A.M.S., A.W., C.B.C., M.M., A.C., L.R., and A.L.M.; intervention design and implementation: A.W., C.B.C., A.M.S., M.M., A.C., L.R., and A.L.M. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted. If accepted, this paper will not subsequently be published in the same or similar form in any language without the consent of publishers.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alan L. Mendelsohn.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from the mothers at enrollment.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Piccolo, L.R., Roby, E., Canfield, C.F. et al. Supporting responsive parenting in real-world implementation: minimal effective dose of the Video Interaction Project. Pediatr Res 95, 1295–1300 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-023-02916-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-023-02916-4

Search

Advanced search

Quick links