Abstract
Parent–coaching interventions positively impact child development. Virtual delivery of such interventions is supported by literature reviews and a practice guideline, however, none of these focused on children under age six. A scoping review of virtually-delivered parent-coaching interventions for disruptive behaviour, anxiety, and parent–child relationship concerns in children under age six was conducted between Dec. 15, 2020 and April 22, 2021. Iterative searches of the databases PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were complemented by reference list searches and clinician expert review (N = 1146). After relevance screening and duplicate removal, collaboratively-developed inclusion criteria were applied to records, followed by data extraction from eligible articles (n = 30). Most literature documented behavioural-based interventions targeting disruptive behaviour which were delivered individually, by therapists, to White, non-Hispanic parents. Evidence supports feasibility and efficacy of virtually-delivered parent-coaching interventions to improve child disruptive behaviour (strong), anxiety (moderate), and parent–child relationship (weak). There is a significant gap in the literature regarding the virtual delivery of attachment-based parent-coaching interventions. In sum, virtual parent coaching can be an efficacious approach for children under age six, particularly for behavioural challenges.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Disruptive behaviour, anxiety, and strain in the parent–child relationship are the most common reasons for families with children under age six to be referred for mental health services [1]. Anxiety disorders and disruptive behavioural disorders are very common in children under the age of six, with prevalence rates close to 10% each, which is very similar to rates amongst older children [2, 3]. Early intervention has been shown to positively impact later socio-emotional functioning and success in the school environment [4]. Treatment options can include parent coaching interventions, parent–child dyadic therapies, child-focused therapies (e.g., play therapy), and less commonly, pharmacotherapy [5]. Given developmental needs and the primacy of the parent–child relationship for this population (i.e., those under the age of six), involving the parent(s) and/or caregivers is crucial to the success of any treatment plan to address early childhood anxiety disorders or disruptive behaviour disorders [6, 7].
Two theoretical models which most commonly underpin these early childhood mental health interventions are behaviourism and attachment theory [1]. Behavioural-based parenting interventions have a rich evidence base, particularly for the treatment of disruptive behaviour [8]. A model for behavioural parent training that was developed by Hanf [9, 10] has been foundational to most subsequent behavioural parent training interventions, including the Incredible Years [11], and Helping the Noncompliant Child [12, 13]. The Hanf model drew from family systems theory, social learning theory, and operant conditioning principles to coach parents in the skilled use of positive reinforcement and restricted use of aversive consequences. Parents are taught positive parenting skills, particularly use of parental attention (in the form of praise and child-centered play) and positive reinforcement (such as incentive rewards), to shape and increase appropriate behaviour (e.g., compliance) in their children. Parents are also taught how to limit inappropriate child behaviour through prevention strategies (e.g., environmental and instructional accommodations) and select, purposeful use of consequences (e.g., removal of privileges). Moderate effect sizes for improvements in child disruptive behaviour is a well-established outcome for behavioural-based parenting interventions amongst several meta-analyses, and many studies have shown effectiveness with this intervention approach across settings and populations [14,15,16,17,18,19,20]. Further details of some behavioural-based parenting interventions can be found in Box 1.
Attachment-based parenting interventions draw on elements of attachment theory as first developed by Bowlby [21] and Ainsworth [22]. It is held widely among contemporary experts that one of the most useful applications of attachment theory is in the development of therapeutic interventions to support young children and their caregivers [23]. Therapeutic targets of attachment-based parenting interventions generally fall within two domains. The first target seeks to enhance caregivers’ reflective functioning capacities. The second target seeks to promote caregiving behaviours associated with secure attachment. The scope of attachment-based interventions is quite varied, with some interventions focusing more explicitly on enhancing caregiver reflection and others focusing more explicitly on the promotion of sensitive caregiving behaviours. Attachment-based interventions share a common goal of creating a therapeutic milieu of safety for caregivers, which creates the opportunity for caregivers to reflect and develop new parenting skills.
Among those attachment-based interventions with the strongest evidence base are Child Parent Psychotherapy (CPP) [24, 25], Video-feedback to Promote Positive Parenting (VIPP)[26, 27], and Attachment and Biobehavioural Catch-Up (ABC) [28]. Circle of Security (COS), an intervention directly informed by attachment theory, also has an emerging evidence base [29]. Attachment-based interventions have been shown to increase attachment security, increase parental sensitivity and improve emotional regulation skills in children [30, 31]. Other outcomes noted in studies of attachment-based interventions include reductions in parenting stress and reduced rates of disruptive behaviours in children [32, 33]. Attachment-based interventions have been implemented successfully with families at higher risk for parent–child relational problems, such as adoptive families and families whose members have been exposed to significant adversity, such as poverty, domestic violence and other forms of trauma [30, 34]. Further details of some attachment-based parenting interventions can be found in Box 1.
There have been strong opinions and misconceptions between practitioners who are predominantly behavioural-based or attachment-based [35]. For instance, behavioural strategies can be portrayed as undermining attachment security, while attachment approaches can be seen as permissive. Rather than seeing these approaches as contradictory, our perspective aligns with a rich literature that views both these approaches as complementary [1, 36, 37]. Both types of interventions emphasize positive parenting with concepts that are similarly aligned. That is, the behavioural focus on positive attention and setting limits is consistent with the attachment focus of “being with” and “taking charge”, respectively. In fact, Troutman has provided a framework for coaching parents from an integrated behavioural- and attachment- based perspective [1], and there are interventions that are both behavioral-based and attachment-based. One such intervention with an extensive evidence base is Parent–Child Interaction Therapy [12, 20].
The Gap in the Literature and Study Purpose
While historically, there has been an emphasis on the importance of delivering interventions in-person, tele-mental health services have become increasingly popular [38]. Virtual delivery of services increases access to underserved populations (e.g., rural communities), and reduces barriers for families (e.g., reduces travel and childcare demands). During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a seismic shift across the board in healthcare from a default of in-person care to reliance on virtual care to enable safe care delivery. However, this shift was motivated by necessity rather than evidence. Now that health care services are transitioning back to in-person care delivery, health care teams are re-evaluating how to strike the balance between in-person and virtual care provision. An understanding of the existing evidence-base regarding virtual care delivery can help to inform this decision-making process.
Several reviews have shown the effectiveness of virtual delivery of mental health services for children and adolescents [39,40,41], including a practice guideline published by the American Telemedicine Association [42]. While these guidelines included some considerations specific to those age six and under, the research on which they were based was mostly with children and youth over age six. A recent scoping review reported on the nature and range of early childhood mental health interventions [6]. However, this review only included articles published before 2013 and the authors acknowledged there were a number of studies of interventions delivered online that have been published since then. The purpose of the current scoping review was to respond to this gap in the literature by mapping available evidence of virtually-delivered parent coaching interventions to promote early childhood mental health.
Methods
A scoping review of the literature was conducted between Dec. 15, 2020 and April 22, 2021 according to published methodology [43,44,45]. Scoping reviews are well suited to comprehensively mapping out available research in emerging areas such as this in contrast to systematic reviews, which are ideal for answering targeted questions by appraising the quality of a fairly sophisticated evidence base and synthesizing the results [46]. As is typical for scoping reviews [43], our search strategy was iterative, meaning that, as we became more familiar with the literature, we repeated steps in the scoping review process using additional, more sensitive and specific, search terms in an effort to ensure that our scoping review was comprehensive in its coverage of the available evidence. In our first set of searches, we searched the databases PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO using the terms: “telepsychiatry”; “telemental health”; “e-health”; “psych*”; “telehealth”; “telemedicine”; “videoconferencing”; “teleconferencing”; and “videoteleconferencing” (See Supplemental material for exact search strings). For all searches, the following filters were applied: “Human”, “English”, “infant/ preschool” (defined by PubMed and CINAHL as 1 month—5 years, and by PsycINFO as 2 months—5 years). No filter was applied for publication date, so all publications in those databases until April 22, 2021 were included.
The first author assessed the titles and abstracts of all articles identified in the databases for relevance. All authors collaboratively drafted the inclusion and exclusion criteria for determination of eligibility, but this was iteratively refined over the course of reviewing titles and abstracts of identified records (Table 1). As part of this refinement process, the second author reviewed the first author’s screening of the titles and abstracts of the first 100 records for categorization into eligible, ambiguous (needs full text review), and ineligible. An Excel spreadsheet was used to support tracking and categorization, and provided an audit trail. Once the inclusion and exclusion criteria had been solidified, the first author reviewed the rest of the titles and abstracts of all articles identified using the first set of search terms. The full list of potentially eligible articles (those categorized as either ‘ambiguous’ or ‘eligible’) was then reviewed by the second author (n = 129). The full articles were obtained for those publications that were judged by both authors to be relevant, or to require further information to determine whether they met inclusion criteria. Reference lists of all potentially relevant review articles that were identified in the searches were reviewed to identify any additional articles for inclusion which hadn’t been identified in the initial searches. Review strategy and preliminary results (28 eligible articles) were assessed by two clinical investigators in the field (at the authors’ home institution; one with expertise in behavioural-based interventions, one with expertise in attachment-based interventions) to identify potential areas/articles that were missing. Based on this expert review and the preliminary results, we conducted a second set of searches of the databases PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO using the same filters, but with the addition of the terms: “attach*”; “behav*”; “online”; “virtual”; “digital”; “remote”; and "mental health". Again, the reference lists of all potentially relevant review articles that were identified in the searches or suggested by the clinical investigators were reviewed for additional eligible articles. Also based on a recommendation from the clinical investigators, the first author searched clinicaltrials.gov for any studies that were registered but for which we had not found published results.
Full texts of all potentially relevant articles were reviewed by the first author, with secondary review by the second author of any articles whose eligibility was ambiguous. The focus of the full-text screening for articles categorized as ‘ambiguous’ was to search for information relevant to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, when it was not available in the abstracts. For example, the most common detail missing from the abstract was the average age of children who participated. At this stage, the authors recognized that, while most articles identified in the searches that were targeting difficulties in the parent–child relationship were not delivered virtually, there were a subset of records describing such interventions using video feedback. The authors felt that video feedback could be well suited to virtual delivery, given the compatibility and efficacy of video-conferencing platforms in healthcare [47]. Thus, we agreed upon an exploratory sub-aim for the review. This exploratory sub-aim was to describe the use of video feedback for interventions targeting difficulties in the parent–child relationship. For this sub-aim, articles identified in the course of the search that reported the use of video feedback in the context of interventions directed towards the parent–child relationship were summarized descriptively, without data charting. When the final set of eligible records had been determined, the first author drafted the fields for charting the data, and then all three authors met to review the data charting form and process, as recommended [43, 44]. After incorporating feedback into the charting form, the first author charted five articles and then shared the completed forms with the co-authors for review and further feedback. After incorporating this round of feedback, the first author completed data charting for the remaining eligible records which presented original research. Results were collated and summarized descriptively.
Results
A total of 1146 records were identified, and 777 were screened, following removal of duplicates. Figure 1 presents the process by which we identified eligible records for inclusion, with details about reasons for exclusion. A summary mapping out features of the available literature is presented in Table 2, detailed characteristics of all eligible original research articles included in the main analysis (n = 30) are presented in Table 3, and descriptions of adaptations of included interventions for virtual delivery are in Box 1.
The majority of eligible literature was published in the past five years (n = 24, 80%), and only three records (10%) were published over a decade ago. From a methodological perspective, included articles were mainly randomized controlled trials (RCT; n = 22, 73.33%) focused on intervention outcomes; there were very few studies that included qualitative methods or focused on intervention process. The vast majority of participants in eligible studies were White, with only three studies (10%) for which more than a third of participants were racially/ethnically diverse [48,49,50]. Eligible ages for the children included in the studies ranged from 1.5 to 10 years, but the majority of studies included only children 6 years or younger (n = 20; 66.67%). Less than a quarter (n = 7, 23.33%) of the studies included in this review presented results for mothers and fathers separately [49, 51,52,53,54,55]; mostly parents were considered altogether and the majority of participants were mothers. Further, most studies reported numbers of males/females for children receiving interventions, but few reported analyses of differences in outcome by sex of the child.
Feasibility
There is strong evidence that behavioural-based parent-coaching interventions targeting disruptive behaviour or anxiety in the early childhood population can be delivered virtually. All studies that measured parent satisfaction reported moderate-high intervention satisfaction or acceptability. With regards to program completion, on average, three quarters of participants completed therapist-guided behavioural-based programs (76.9%), while only a third of participants completed self-guided behavioural-based programs (33.68%). For self-guided programs, most participants completed half the available modules. Intervention engagement and satisfaction were generally greater with increasing therapist involvement [50, 54, 56, 57]. The three attachment-informed parent-coaching interventions identified in this review demonstrated the feasibility of delivering the interventions online. The study of the Emotional Attachment and Emotional Availability (EA2) program reported a remarkable 100% completion rate (with individual make-up sessions conducted). Participant feedback from the Child Parent Relationship Therapy (CPRT) online program highlighted a number of positive themes including convenience, ability to work at one’s own pace, accessibility, and benefits of not having to travel and being able to participate from one’s own home. Studies of internet-delivered Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (I-PCIT) have reported completion rates of 60–70%, with qualitative feedback from participants noting strong therapeutic alliance and lower barriers to I-PCIT compared to PCIT delivered in clinic.
For interventions using videoconferencing technology, loss of connection/disruption to the intervention was noted, and this represented a more significant barrier for geographically remote regions with poorer internet connectivity. It was possible to overcome this barrier if programs had the financial resources to provide participants with high quality internet, as seen in one study that sent participants an internet ‘dongle’ to access highspeed internet for mobile devices [58]. Few studies compared virtual delivery of interventions to in-person delivery, but participants in one such study noted fewer barriers to engaging in the intervention when delivered virtually [48], and this finding is echoed in the one qualitative study included in this review [58].
Only one study reported a cost analysis [50], and found a significantly higher start-up cost to delivering the intervention virtually (Technology-enhanced Helping the Noncompliant Child (TE-HNC)—$671/family) compared to treatment as usual (in clinic HNC—$10/family). It is important to note that the cost of the TE-HNC intervention included providing each family with a smartphone, including service plan, and tripod for use in video recording home practice sessions. Given the increasingly ubiquitous presence of smartphones in households, and decreasing costs of service plans, these start-up costs would be significantly reduced in the current (and likely future) technology climate. Interestingly, the implementation costs of mastering a skill in TE-HNC were slightly less (M = $80) compared to in-clinic HNC (M = $82). The costs of TE-HNC were lower because families in this group were able to master skills and complete the program more quickly, with a mean of eight sessions compared to an average of 10 sessions for the in-clinic HNC group. Thus, even with the greater intensity of therapist engagement in the TE-HNC group, therapists spent less time on this group overall, resulting in a lower implementation cost.
Efficacy
For parent–child relationship concerns, virtual delivery of the attachment-informed intervention EA2 demonstrated efficacy in improving parent–child attachment and child problem behaviour [59], and an online version of CPRT demonstrated positive outcomes in the domain of parental acceptance of their children [60], all with large effect sizes.
Efficacy in improving child anxiety symptoms was demonstrated for the virtual delivery of the behavioural-based interventions BRAVE Online and Cool Little Kids Online, and the behavioural- and attachment-based intervention Internet-delivered Coaching Approach behaviour and Leading by Modeling (I-CALM; an adaptation of I-PCIT) (although the evidence for I-CALM is weak—only one case study [49]). BRAVE-Online demonstrated medium effect sizes in improvements in severity and symptoms of child anxiety, and child functioning, while Cool Little Kids Online demonstrated slightly lower magnitudes of small—medium effect sizes in child anxiety symptoms and child functioning. Remission rates for the two interventions were dramatically different post-intervention, with 60.1% for Cool Little Kids Online, compared to 34.8% for BRAVE-Online. However, at the 6-month follow-up assessment for BRAVE-Online, there was a remission rate of 70.6%, along with an increase in module completion rate (from 42.1% completion of module 5 (including the exposure session), to 73.9% completion of module 5).
Efficacy in improving child disruptive behaviour symptoms was demonstrated with at least one RCT, and generally large effect sizes, for the virtual delivery of the behavioural-based interventions Helping the Noncompliant Child (HNC), “Parenting Matters” (therapist-guided bibliotherapy), Promoting Engagement for ADHD Pre-Kindergartners (PEAK), Research Unit on Behavioral Interventions—Parent Training (RUBI-PT), Strengthening Families, Triple P, and “Wackelpeter und Trotzkopf” (therapist-guided bibliotherapy), and the behavioural- and attachment-based intervention I-PCIT. Only one study reported remission rate, which was a study of I-PCIT reporting a remission rate of 55% [48]. Effect sizes for intervention impact were larger, in general, as intensity of the intervention increased. This was demonstrated directly in some RCTs of interventions of differing intensity. For example, larger effect sizes were found for the group that had virtually delivered TE-HNC (which included smartphone enhancements like skills videos, daily progress surveys, mid-week video calls, and text reminders) compared to the group that had HNC in clinic [50]. Reliable and clinically significant change post-treatment in terms of child behaviour was demonstrated for the majority of participants for TE-HNC, I-PCIT, self-directed Triple P, enhanced self-directed Triple P, self-directed Triple P Online, and enhanced Triple P Online [48, 50, 51, 54, 61, 62].
Efficacy to enhance parenting skills was demonstrated, with generally medium—large effect sizes, for virtual delivery of the interventions I-PCIT, Strengthening Families, Triple P, and “Wackelpeter und Trotzkopf” (therapist-guided bibliotherapy). Evidence of efficacy for improving indirect parenting outcomes (e.g., parental distress or inter-parental conflict) was more inconsistent, but more likely with increasing intervention intensity. For example, no changes in distal parental outcome variables were found for a brief 5-session self-guided Triple P online program [63], whereas significant improvements in parental stress and inter-parental conflict were found for an 8-session Triple P online program, and further improvements in parental depression and anxiety were found when the Triple P online program had practitioner support [56].
Effectiveness
This scoping review identified only two implementation studies—one for the Strongest Families Smart Website (SFSW) [64] and one for I-PCIT [61]. The implementation study of SFSW reported on the feasibility of its implementation in a real-world primary care context. It demonstrated higher engagement with the program (higher completion rate, time spent on the website, and number of coaching phone calls) relative to a comparison group in a previously published RCT [65], as well as similar levels of satisfaction with the website and coaches. It is important to note that ratings of child psychopathology were significantly higher in the implementation study, which could potentially explain the greater levels of program engagement for this group.
The implementation study of I-PCIT reported on both feasibility and effectiveness of its implementation in a real-world primary care context. It demonstrated similar levels of engagement and satisfaction to a comparison group in a previously published RCT [48]. In terms of effectiveness, 88.2% of those who completed treatment were below clinical cut-off at post-treatment assessment for frequency of disruptive behaviours (Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory-Intensity) and 82.4% were below cut-off for number of behaviours perceived by the family to be problematic (Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory-Problem), with very large and large effect sizes, respectively.
Exploration of Parent Coaching Interventions Using Video Feedback to Improve the Parent–Child Relationship
Although this review only identified two studies of virtually-delivered parent coaching interventions that were solely attachment-based, and focused on parent–child relationship concerns, both interventions used video feedback to review parent–child interactions, which is a common therapeutic tool within attachment-based interventions [66]. The positive impact of video feedback in attachment-based interventions has been highlighted in two meta-analyses. The first meta-analysis found attachment-based interventions using video feedback to be more effective across outcomes than interventions that did not include a component of video-feedback [30]. The second meta-analysis, focusing specifically on family interventions that incorporate video feedback as a therapeutic tool, found video feedback to have a positive impact on parenting behaviour and parental attitude, as well as positive effects on the development of children [67]. One of the attachment-based interventions with the strongest evidence base is the Video-feedback Intervention to promote Positive Parenting (VIPP). This intervention relies on video-feedback, as does its various adaptations: VIPP-SD (Video-feedback Intervention to promote Positive Parenting and Sensitive Discipline) [68], VIPP-AUTI (Video-feedback Intervention to promote Positive Parenting adapted to Autism) [69], and VIPP-Co (Video-feedback Intervention for Co-parents of infants at risk for externalizing behaviour problems) [70]. Another video-feedback intervention with evidence from randomized controlled trials is AVI (Attachment-based Video Feedback Intervention) [71, 72].
Video-feedback has also been explored as an add-on to existing evidence-based interventions such as the Family Check Up [73]. In a preliminary study examining the effect of adding a video-feedback intervention component to the assessment feedback session of the Family Check-Up Intervention, researchers found that reviewing and engaging in feedback about videotaped interactions between parents and their children at age two predicted reduced caregivers’ negative relational schemas at age three, which acted as an intervening variable on the reduction of observed parent–child coercive interactions recorded at age five. Video-feedback has been applied successfully in interventions targeting populations with parents and children at risk for parent–child relational problems to promote attachment and reduce physiological dysregulation [66]. Further, it has shown potential in the context of cross-cultural healthcare delivery to racial or ethnic minority families [74]. When used intentionally, video feedback can act as a clinical engagement tool that can be used to enhance therapist cultural competence, and strengthen therapeutic alliance between clinicians and clients who come from different cultural backgrounds.
Discussion
This scoping review mapped out literature regarding the virtual delivery of parent-coaching interventions for disruptive behaviour, anxiety, or parent–child relationship in the early childhood population. The vast majority of this literature has focused on interventions with a behavioural basis (with or without an additional foundation in attachment theory) targeting disruptive behaviour, delivered on an individual basis by therapists to White families. Although this review documented that the majority of publications investigating virtual delivery of parent coaching interventions were categorized as primarily behavioural- or attachment-based (n = 24, 80%), we advocate the benefits of both approaches for supporting families in the field of early childhood mental health.
There is consistent evidence supporting the feasibility of delivering parent-coaching interventions virtually, with high satisfaction and acceptability, and fewer barriers to access. Having said that, it is important to note the remaining potential for disparities in access for rural communities with limited internet infrastructure and other populations with lower resources, such as low-income families. In terms of efficacy, there is solid evidence that virtually-delivered behavioural-based interventions can improve child disruptive behaviour and parenting skills, with medium to large effects. These outcomes are in keeping with, or at times stronger than, available evidence supporting the delivery of these interventions in-person. Though effectiveness studies remain largely undocumented in the literature, there are two published studies that demonstrate successful implementation and strong outcomes in real-world primary care contexts of virtually-delivered interventions for child disruptive behaviour that are either behavioural-based or both behavioural- and attachment-based.
This review brings into focus the lack of published research on the efficacy of virtually-delivered interventions that are (1) solely attachment-based, and/or (2) focused on parent–child relationship concerns. That being said, although the pilot studies of EA2 online and CPRT online included in this review were limited by their small sample sizes and lack of randomization, both studies provide preliminary evidence of the efficacy of the virtual delivery of interventions targeting parent–child relationship concerns for caregivers and young children that are solely attachment- and/or relationship-based (not behavioural-based). They also highlight the potential benefits of video feedback in virtual care settings. Video feedback as a therapeutic tool within parent coaching interventions may be particularly amenable to virtual care delivery and is worthy of further study. For instance, there is a recent development of a virtually-delivered VIPP intervention [75].
Implications for Practice
The global adoption of virtual health care during the COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the benefits of virtually delivered interventions, which will likely continue to expand into the foreseeable future. For early childhood mental health interventions that focus on virtual coaching of parents and caregivers, there are several evidence-based programs that practitioners can consider. For the treatment of anxiety in the early childhood population, Cool Little Kids Online is an excellent option—it performed very well in terms of remission rate, and is an entirely self-guided intervention and so has a lower initial investment cost [76]. Minimal information was provided regarding characteristics of the populations studied, however, so further research is needed to explore the suitability of this intervention for different groups. Therapist involvement, for example, in the BRAVE-Online or I-CALM interventions, would likely be particularly important for tailoring treatment to the needs of specialized groups.
For the treatment of disruptive behaviour in the early childhood population, self-directed Triple P is a solid program [77]—either online (TPOL), or using the hard copy book and workbook, depending on internet availability and parent preference [55]. Reliable and clinically significant improvements in child disruptive behaviour have been demonstrated in multiple RCTs for parents using the self-directed Triple P intervention, which offers a lower therapist-time investment. The studies supporting the self-guided Triple P intervention were conducted with parents who were mainly White, highly educated, and of a moderate-high socio-economic status, although two studies did provide evidence in support of the efficacy of the intervention for parents who lived in rural areas, with lower levels of education, and of lower socio-economic status. Thus, therapist involvement in the interventions TE-HNC, I-PCIT, and enhanced Triple P (Online) would be key to tailoring treatment to be linguistically and culturally sensitive and appropriate for populations who are racialized or otherwise disadvantaged. Further, it is vital to consider and take steps to mitigate the risk of magnifying health inequities resulting from the digital divide, in which marginalized families are disproportionately excluded from virtually-delivered care [78].
Limitations
This review was limited to articles published in English, so more evidence may exist in support of virtual delivery of these interventions in other languages, to more racially/ethnically diverse populations. Our use of the “infant/preschool” filters in the literature databases could have excluded some articles focused on children who were 6 years old (since the filters had an age limit of 5 years old). However, we did exclude 16 articles at the full-text review stage because their participants had a mean age greater than 6, so the filters did not screen out all research on populations over 5 years old. Additionally, we excluded articles that focused on providing interventions to parents of children with genetic syndromes or medical comorbidities that could impact engagement in the interventions; thus, we are unable to comment on the evidence base that may or may not exist in support of the feasibility, efficacy, or effectiveness of virtually delivering these interventions to these populations. As always, it is important to remain cognizant of the potential publication bias whereby studies with negative/non-significant results are more likely to be unpublished, thus biasing our findings towards intervention efficacy and effectiveness. Finally, given that this was a scoping review, rather than a systematic review, we did not evaluate the quality of the evidence or conduct an assessment of bias, and as such, this limits our capacity to draw conclusions in terms of practice recommendations or implications. The nature of the scoping review does, however, enable identification of gaps in the literature and recommendations for avenues that would be worthwhile for future research.
Future Research
In particular, there is an urgent need for research to address the significant gaps in the literature identified by this review with respect to the virtual delivery of interventions for the early childhood population that are (1) solely attachment-based, and/or (2) focused on parent–child relationship concerns. Other potentially fruitful avenues of inquiry with currently limited literature bases for the early childhood population include the virtual delivery of: (1) group interventions, (2) interventions targeting anxiety, and (3) interventions to marginalized populations and rural populations. Future studies could also compare the “felt experience” of participants in virtually-delivered interventions versus in-person interventions, and whether this may impact intervention outcomes. It would also be useful for future research to include qualitative methods, studies of intervention process in addition to outcome, sex- and gender-based analyses, and to prioritize involvement of fathers/co-parents.
Finally, it would be worthwhile for future research to investigate the relative effectiveness, including cost-effectiveness, of different integrated care models. There is some preliminary evidence from this scoping review of the potential effectiveness of implementing a stepped-care model, in which patients first receive brief, low-intensity interventions, and initial non-responders “step up” to receive additional and/or more intensive treatment. This is supported by our scoping review given that: (1) brief online interventions that are entirely self-guided can improve outcomes and may be sufficient for a subset of the population in need, and (2) interventions of greater intensity have been demonstrated to have greater clinical impact. Future research could compare, for example, the unidirectional stepped care model versus a mechanism to screen referrals to triage those whose children have more severe symptoms into higher intensity interventions up-front (e.g., tiers of service), and the intersect between virtual versus in-person delivery of service at each stage or intensity level of intervention.
Summary
In this scoping review of the literature regarding virtually-delivered parent-coaching interventions for disruptive behaviour, anxiety, or parent–child relationship in children under age 6, data were extracted from 30 eligible articles. The majority of these studies focused on interventions with a behavioural basis (with or without an additional foundation in attachment theory) targeting disruptive behaviour which were delivered individually, by therapists, to White, non-Hispanic parents. While evidence is somewhat limited, particularly with respect to the virtual delivery of solely attachment-based interventions and/or those targeting the parent–child relationship, the evidence that exists does support the efficacy of virtually delivering parent-coaching interventions to improve child disruptive behaviour, child anxiety, and the parent–child relationship for the early childhood mental health population. Avenues for future research in the area of virtual delivery of parent coaching interventions for the early childhood population identified by this review include: solely attachment-based interventions, interventions focused on the parent–child relationship or anxiety, delivery in a group format, inclusion of marginalized populations, rural populations, and fathers/co-parents, qualitative studies, studies focused on intervention process, sex- and gender-based analyses, and analyses of different integrated care models, including cost-effectiveness analyses.
Data Availability
All data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Change history
08 November 2023
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-023-01632-8
References
Troutman B (2015) Integrating behaviorism and attachment theory in parent coaching. Springer International Publishing, New York
Egger HL, Angold A (2006) Common emotional and behavioral disorders in preschool children: presentation, nosology, and epidemiology. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 47(3–4):313–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1469-7610.2006.01618.X
Raver, C. C., & Knitzer, J. (2002). Ready to Enter: What Research Tells Policymakers About Strategies to Promote Social and Emotional School Readiness Among Three- and Four-Year-Old Children. https://doi.org/10.7916/D82V2QVX
Ramey CT, Ramey SL (1998) Early intervention and early experience. Am Psychol 53(2):109–120. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.53.2.109
Zeanah PD, Bailey LO, Berry S (2009) Infant mental health and the ‘real world’—opportunities for interface and impact. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am 18(3):773–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHC.2009.03.006
McLuckie A, Landers AL, Curran JA, Cann R, Carrese DH, Nolan A, Corrigan K, Carrey NJ (2019) A scoping review of mental health prevention and intervention initiatives for infants and preschoolers at risk for socio-emotional difficulties. Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13643-019-1043-3
Zeanah CH Jr (2019) Handbook of Infant Mental Health, 4th edn. Guilford Publications, New York
Kaehler LA, Jacobs M, Jones DJ (2016) Distilling common history and practice elements to inform dissemination: hanf-model BPT programs as an example. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 19(3):236. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10567-016-0210-5
Hanf, C. (1969). A two-stage program for modifying maternal controlling during mother-child (M-C) interaction. Paper Presented at the Western Psychological Association.
Hanf, C., & Kling, J. (1973). Facilitating parent-child interaction: A two-stage training model.
Menting ATA, Orobio de Castro B, Matthys W (2013) Effectiveness of the Incredible Years parent training to modify disruptive and prosocial child behavior: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev 33(8):901–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CPR.2013.07.006
Eyberg, S. M., & Funderburg, B. (2011). Parent-child interaction therapy protocol . PCIT International.
McMahon RJ, Forehand RL (2003) Helping the noncompliant child: Family—based treatment for oppositional behavior. Guilford Press, New York
Gardner F, Leijten P, Harris V, Mann J, Hutchings J, Beecham J, Bonin EM, Berry V, McGilloway S, Gaspar M, Seabra-Santos MJ, Orobio de Castro B, Menting A, Williams M, Axberg U, Morch WT, Scott S, Landau S (2019) Equity effects of parenting interventions for child conduct problems: a pan-European individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry 6(6):518–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30162-2
Kuhn M, Gonzalez E, Weil L, Izguttinov A, Walker S (2022) Effectiveness of child-focused interventions for externalizing behavior: a rapid evidence review. Res Child Adolesc Psychopathol. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10802-022-00904-6
Leijten P, Gardner F, Melendez-Torres GJ, van Aar J, Hutchings J, Schulz S, Knerr W, Overbeek G (2019) Meta-analyses: key parenting program components for disruptive child behavior. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 58(2):180–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.07.900
Maciel L, Gomis-Pomares A, Day C, Basto-Pereira M (2023) Cross-cultural adaptability of parenting interventions designed for childhood behavior problems: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 102:102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CPR.2023.102274
Mingebach T, Kamp-Becker I, Christiansen H, Weber L (2018) Meta-meta-analysis on the effectiveness of parent-based interventions for the treatment of child externalizing behavior problems. PloS one. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0202855
Nogueira S, Canário AC, Abreu-Lima I, Teixeira P, Cruz O (2022) Group triple p intervention effects on children and parents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH19042113
Valero-Aguayo L, Rodríguez-Bocanegra M, Ferro-García R, Ascanio-Velasco L (2021) Meta-analysis of the efficacy and effectiveness of parent child interaction therapy (PCIT) for child behaviour problems. Psicothema 33(4):544–555. https://doi.org/10.7334/PSICOTHEMA2021.70
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. Vol 1: Attachment. Basic Books.
Ainsworth M (1967) Infancy in Uganda. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore
Granqvist P, Sroufe LA, Dozier M, Hesse E, Steele M, van Ijzendoorn M, Solomon J, Schuengel C, Fearon P, Bakermans-Kranenburg M, Steele H, Cassidy J, Carlson E, Madigan S, Jacobvitz D, Foster S, Behrens K, Rifkin-Graboi A, Gribneau N, Duschinsky R et al (2017) Disorganized attachment in infancy: a review of the phenomenon and its implications for clinicians and policy-makers. Attach Hum Dev 19(6):534. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2017.1354040
Lieberman AF (2004) Traumatic stress and quality of attachment: reality and internalization in disorders of infant mental health. Infant Ment Health J 25(4):336–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/IMHJ.20009
Lieberman AF, Ghosh Ippen C, van Horn P (2006) Child-parent psychotherapy: 6-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 45(8):913–918. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CHI.0000222784.03735.92
Juffer F, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, van Ijzendoorn MH (2008) Promoting positive parenting: An attachment based intervention. Taylor & Francis, Milton Park
van Ijzendoorn MH, Schuengel C, Wang Q, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ (2022) Improving parenting, child attachment, and externalizing behaviors: meta-analysis of the first 25 randomized controlled trials on the effects of Video-feedback Intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline. Dev Psychopathol. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579421001462
Grube WA, Liming KW (2018) Attachment and biobehavioral catch-up: a systematic review. Infant Ment Health J 39(6):656–673. https://doi.org/10.1002/IMHJ.21745
Huber A, Hawkins E, Cooper G (2018) Circle of Security. In: Lebow J, Chambers A, Breunlin DC (eds) Encyclopedia of Couple and Family Therapy. Springer, Cham
Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, van Ijzendoorn MH, Juffer F (2003) Less is more: meta-analyses of sensitivity and attachment interventions in early childhood. Psychol Bull 129(2):195–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.195
Hepworth AD, Berlin LJ, Martoccio TL, Cannon EN, Berger RH, Harden BJ (2020) Supporting infant emotion regulation through attachment-based intervention: a randomized controlled trial. Prev Sci : Off J Soc Prev Res 21(5):702–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11121-020-01127-1
Gregory M, Kannis-Dymand L, Sharman R (2020) A review of attachment-based parenting interventions: recent advances and future considerations. Aust J Psychol 72(2):109–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/AJPY.12270
Kohlhoff J, Cibralic S (2021) The impact of attachment-based parenting interventions on externalizing behaviors in toddlers and preschoolers: a systematic narrative review. Child Youth Care Forum. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10566-021-09667-5/FIGURES/2
Rose J, O’Reilly B (2017) A systematic review of attachment-based psychotherapeutic interventions for adopted children. Early Child Dev Care 187(12):1844–1862. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1204608
Dadds MR, Tully LA (2019) What is it to discipline a child: What should it be? A reanalysis of time-out from the perspective of child mental health, attachment, and trauma. Am Psychol 74(7):794–808. https://doi.org/10.1037/AMP0000449
Eyberg SM, Funderburk BW, Hembree-Kigin TL, McNeil CB, Querido JG, Hood KK (2008) Parent-child interaction therapy with behavior problem children: one and two year maintenance of treatment effects in the family. Child Fam Behav Ther 23(4):1–20. https://doi.org/10.1300/J019V23N04_01
Speltz ML, De Klyen M, Greenberg MT, Dryden M (1995) Clinic referral for oppositional defiant disorder: relative significance of attachment and behavioral variables. J Abnorm Child Psychol 23(4):487–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01447210
Langarizadeh M, Tabatabaei MS, Tavakol K, Naghipour M, Rostami A, Moghbeli F (2017) Telemental health care, an effective alternative to conventional mental care: a systematic review. Acta Inform Med : AIM : J Soc Med Inform Bosnia & Herzegovina : Casopis Drustva Za Medicinsku Inform BiH 25(4):240–246. https://doi.org/10.5455/AIM.2017.25.240-246
Langarizadeh M, Tabatabaei MS, Tavakol K, Naghipour M, Rostami A, Moghbeli F (2017) Telemental health care, an effective alternative to conventional mental care: a systematic review. Acta Inform Medica 25(4):240–246. https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2017.25.240-246
McLean SA, Booth AT, Schnabel A, Wright BJ, Painter FL, McIntosh JE (2021) Exploring the efficacy of telehealth for family therapy through systematic, meta-analytic, and qualitative evidence. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 24(2):244–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10567-020-00340-2/TABLES/4
Zhou X, Edirippulige S, Bai X, Bambling M (2021) Are online mental health interventions for youth effective? a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare 27(10):638–666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X211047285
Myers K, Nelson E, Rabinowitz T, Hilty D, Baker D, Barnwell S, Boyce G, Bufka L, Cain S, Chui L, Comer J, Cradock C, Goldstein F, Johnston B, Krupinski E, Lo K, Luxton D, McSwain S, McWilliams J, Bernard J et al (2017) American telemedicine association practice guidelines for telemental health with children and adolescents. Telemed J E-Health : Off J AmTelemed Assoc 23(10):779–804. https://doi.org/10.1089/TMJ.2017.0177
Arksey H, O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK (2010) Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 5(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
Peters M, Godfrey C, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares C (2015) Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc 13(3):141–146. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050
Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E (2018) Systematic review or scoping review? guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 18(1):143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
Batastini AB, Paprzycki P, Jones ACT, MacLean N (2021) Are videoconferenced mental and behavioral health services just as good as in-person? A meta-analysis of a fast-growing practice. Clin Psychol Rev 83:101944. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CPR.2020.101944
Comer JS, Furr JM, Miguel EM, Cooper-Vince CE, Carpenter AL, Elkins RM, Kerns CE, Cornacchio D, Chou T, Coxe S, Deserisy M, Sanchez AL, Golik A, Martin J, Myers KM, Chase R (2017) Remotely delivering real-time parent training to the home: an initial randomized trial of Internet-delivered parent-child interaction therapy (I-PCIT). J Consult Clin Psychol 85(9):909–917. https://doi.org/10.1037/CCP0000230
Cooper-Vince C, Chou T, Furr J, Puliafico A, Comer J (2016) Videoteleconferencing early child anxiety treatment: a case study of the internet-delivered PCIT CALM (I-CALM) program. Evid-Based Pract Child Adolesc Mental Health 1(1):24–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/23794925.2016.1191976
Jones DJ, Forehand R, Cuellar J, Parent J, Honeycutt A, Khavjou O, Gonzalez M, Anton M, Newey GA (2014) Technology-enhanced program for child disruptive behavior disorders: development and pilot randomized control trial. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 43(1):88–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.822308
Connell S, Sanders M, Markie-Dadds C (1997) Self-directed behavioral family intervention for parents of oppositional children in rural and remote areas. Behav Modif 21(4):379–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/01454455970214001
Fleming GE, Kimonis ER, Datyner A, Comer JS (2017) Adapting internet-delivered parent-child interaction therapy to treat co-occurring disruptive behavior and callous-unemotional traits: a case study. Clin Case Stud 16(5):370–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534650117699471
Franke N, Keown L, Sanders M (2020) An RCT of an online parenting program for parents of preschool-aged children With ADHD symptoms. J Atten Disord 24(12):1716–1726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054716667598
Markie-Dadds C, Sanders MR (2006) A Controlled evaluation of an enhanced self-directed behavioural family intervention for parents of children with conduct problems in rural and remote areas. Behav Chang 23(1):55–72. https://doi.org/10.1375/BECH.23.1.55
Sanders MR, Dittman CK, Farruggia SP, Keown LJ (2014) A comparison of online versus workbook delivery of a self-help positive parenting program. J Primary Prevent 35(3):125–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10935-014-0339-2
Day JJ, Sanders MR (2018) Do parents benefit from help when completing a self-guided parenting program online? A randomized controlled trial comparing Triple P online with and without telephone support. Behav Ther 49(6):1020–1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BETH.2018.03.002
DuPaul GJ, Kern L, Belk G, Custer B, Daffner M, Hatfield A, Peek D (2018) Face-to-face versus online behavioral parent training for young children at risk for ADHD: treatment engagement and outcomes. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 47(sup1):S369–S383. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2017.1342544
Kohlhoff J, Cibralic S, Horswood D, Turnell A, Maiuolo M, Morgan S (2020) Feasibility and acceptability of internet-delivered parent-child interaction therapy for rural Australian families: a qualitative investigation. Rural Remote Health. https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH5306
Baker M, Biringen Z, Meyer-Parsons B, Schneider A (2015) Emotional attachment and emotional availability tele-intervention for adoptive families. Infant Ment Health J 36(2):179–192. https://doi.org/10.1002/IMHJ.21498
Hicks B, Baggerly J (2017) The effectiveness of child parent relationship therapy in an online format. Int J Play Ther 26(3):138–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/PLA0000033
Fleming GE, Kohlhoff J, Morgan S, Turnell A, Maiuolo M, Kimonis ER (2021) An effectiveness open trial of internet-delivered parent training for young children with conduct problems living in regional and rural Australia. Behav Ther 52(1):110–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BETH.2020.03.001
Sanders MR, Baker S, Turner KMT (2012) A randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of Triple P Online with parents of children with early-onset conduct problems. Behav Res Ther 50(11):675–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BRAT.2012.07.004
Baker S, Sanders MR, Turner KMT, Morawska A (2017) 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BRAT.2017.01.016
Ristkari T, Kurki M, Suominen A, Gilbert S, Sinokki A, Kinnunen M, Huttunen J, McGrath P, Sourander A (2019) Web-based parent training intervention with telephone coaching for disruptive behavior in 4-year-old children in real-world practice: implementation study. J Med Internet Res. https://doi.org/10.2196/11446
Sourander A, McGrath PJ, Ristkari T, Cunningham C, Huttunen J, Lingley-Pottie P, Hinkka-Yli-Salomäki S, Kinnunen M, Vuorio J, Sinokki A, Fossum S, Unruh A (2016) Internet-assisted parent training intervention for disruptive behavior in 4-year-old children: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiat 73(4):378–387. https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMAPSYCHIATRY.2015.3411
Steele M, Steele H, Bate J, Knafo H, Kinsey M, Bonuck K, Meisner P, Murphy A (2014) Looking from the outside in: the use of video in attachment-based interventions. Attach Hum Dev 16(4):402–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2014.912491
Fukkink RG (2008) Video feedback in widescreen: a meta-analysis of family programs. Clin Psychol Rev 28(6):904–916. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CPR.2008.01.003
Juffer F, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ (2018) Working with video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline (VIPP-SD): a case study. J Clin Psychol 74(8):1346–1357. https://doi.org/10.1002/JCLP.22645
Poslawsky IE, Naber FBA, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, van Daalen E, van Engeland H, van Ijzendoorn MH (2015) Video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting adapted to Autism (VIPP-AUTI): a randomized controlled trial. Autism: Int J Res Prac 19(5):588–603. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361314537124
Iles JE, Rosan C, Wilkinson E, Ramchandani PG (2017) Adapting and developing a video-feedback intervention for co-parents of infants at risk of externalising behaviour problems (VIPP-Co): a feasibility study. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry 22(3):483–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104517704025
Moss E, Tarabulsy GM, St-Georges R, Dubois-Comtois K, Cyr C, Bernier A, St-Laurent D, Pascuzzo K, Lecompte V (2014) Video-feedback intervention with maltreating parents and their children: program implementation and case study. Attach Hum Dev 16(4):329–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2014.912486
Tarabulsy GM, Dubois-Comtois K, Baudry C, Moss E, Roberge A, Savage LE, Cyr C, St-Laurent D, Bernier A (2018) A case study illustrating the use of an attachment video-feedback intervention strategy. J Clin Psychol 74(8):1358–1369. https://doi.org/10.1002/JCLP.22646
Smith JD, Dishion TJ, Moore KJ, Shaw DS, Wilson MN (2013) Effects of video feedback on early coercive parent-child interactions: the intervening role of caregivers’ relational schemas. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 42(3):405–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.777917
Yasui M, Henry DB (2014) Shared understanding as a gateway for treatment engagement: a preliminary study examining the effectiveness of the culturally enhanced video feedback engagement intervention. J Clin Psychol 70(7):658–672. https://doi.org/10.1002/JCLP.22058
van Ijzendoorn MH, Stevens E, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ (2023) Development of the virtual-VIPP and a systematic review of online support for families during the COVID-19 pandemic. Attach Hum Dev 25(2):223–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2023.2179575
Morgan AJ, Rapee RM, Tamir E, Goharpey N, Salim A, McLellan LF, Bayer JK (2015) Preventing anxiety problems in children with Cool Little Kids Online: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13063-015-1022-5
Sanders MR (1999) Triple P-Positive parenting program: towards an empirically validated multilevel parenting and family support strategy for the prevention of behavior and emotional problems in children. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 2(2):71–90. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021843613840
Aisbitt GM, Nolte T, Fonagy P (2022) Editorial perspective: the digital divide - inequalities in remote therapy for children and adolescents. Child Adolesc Mental Health. https://doi.org/10.1111/CAMH.12545
Donovan C, March S (2014) Online CBT for preschool anxiety disorders: a randomised control trial. Behav Res Ther 58:24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BRAT.2014.05.001
Morgan A, Rapee R, Salim A, Goharpey N, Tamir E, McLellan L, Bayer J (2017) Internet-delivered parenting program for prevention and early intervention of anxiety problems in young children: randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 56(5):417-425.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAAC.2017.02.010
Morgan A, Rapee R, Salim A, Bayer J (2018) Predicting response to an internet-delivered parenting program for anxiety in early childhood. Behav Ther 49(2):237–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BETH.2017.07.009
Reid GJ, Stewart M, Vingilis E, Dozois DJA, Wetmore S, Jordan J, Dickie G, Osmun WE, Wade TJ, Brown JB, Zaric GS (2013) Randomized trial of distance-based treatment for young children with discipline problems seen in primary health care. Fam Pract 30(1):14–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/FAMPRA/CMS051
Kierfeld F, Ise E, Hanisch C, Görtz-Dorten A, Döpfner M (2013) Effectiveness of telephone-assisted parent-administered behavioural family intervention for preschool children with externalizing problem behaviour: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 22(9):553–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00787-013-0397-7
Ise E, Kierfeld F, Döpfner M (2015) One-year follow-up of guided self-help for parents of preschool children with externalizing behavior. J Prim Prev 36(1):33–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10935-014-0374-Z
Kohlhoff J, Wallace N, Morgan S, Maiuolo M, Turnell A (2020) Internet-delivered parent–child interaction therapy: two clinical case reports. Clin Psychol 23(3):271–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/CP.12184
Bearss K, Burrell T, Challa S, Postorino V, Gillespie S, Crooks C, Scahill L (2018) Feasibility of parent training via telehealth for children with autism spectrum disorder and disruptive behavior: a demonstration pilot. J Autism Dev Disord 48(4):1020–1030. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10803-017-3363-2
McGrath PJ, Lingley-Pottie P, Thurston C, MacLean C, Cunningham C, Waschbusch DA, Watters C, Stewart S, Bagnell A, Santor D, Chaplin W (2011) Telephone-based mental health interventions for child disruptive behavior or anxiety disorders: randomized trials and overall analysis. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 50(11):1162–1172. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAAC.2011.07.013
Fossum S, Cunningham C, Ristkari T, McGrath PJ, Hinkka-Yli-Salomäki S, Sourander A (2018) Does parental mental health moderate the effect of a telephone and internet-assisted remote parent training for disruptive 4-year-old children? Scand J Psychol 59(3):273–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/SJOP.12430
Baker S, Sanders MR (2017) Predictors of program use and child and parent outcomes of a brief online parenting intervention. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 48(5):807–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10578-016-0706-8
Day JJ, Sanders MR (2017) Mediators of parenting change within a web-based parenting program: evidence from a randomized controlled trial of Triple P online. Couple Fam Psychol: Res Prac 6(3):154–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/CFP0000083
Comer JS, Furr JM, Cooper-Vince C, Madigan RJ, Chow C, Chan P, Idrobo F, Chase RM, McNeil CB, Eyberg SM (2015) Rationale and considerations for the internet-based delivery of parent-child interaction therapy. Cogn Behav Pract 22(3):302. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CBPRA.2014.07.003
Cunningham CE, Bremner R, Boyle M (1995) Large group community-based parenting programs for families of preschoolers at risk for disruptive behaviour disorders: utilization, cost effectiveness, and outcome. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 36(7):1141–1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1469-7610.1995.TB01362.X
Döpfner M, Schürmann S, Lehmkuhl G (2011) Wackelpeter & Trotzkopf. Hilfen für Eltern bei ADHS-Symptomen, hyperkinetischem und oppositionellem Verhalten, 4th edn. Beltz, Weinheim
Acknowledgements
CH would like to thank all members of the BC Children’s Hospital Infant Psychiatry program, as well as Dr. Robert McMahon and Dr. Amrit Dhariwal for their support and critical insights. We also thank Emily Lam for editorial support. The authors offer gratitude to the Coast Salish Peoples, including the xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish), and Səl̓ílwətaʔ/Selilwitulh (Tsleil-Waututh) Nations, on whose traditional, unceded, and ancestral territory we had the privilege of working during the completion of this study.
Funding
CH received salary support from a BC Children’s Hospital Department of Psychiatry Fellowship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Manuscript writing: CH; revised for important intellectual contribution: JM; approved final version: all; Research design: all; Data collection: CH; Data analysis: CH, with oversight from JM.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
No authors have any relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Research Involving Human Participants and Animals
Not applicable.
Ethical Approval
Not required.
Consent to Participate
Not applicable.
Consent for Publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Hippman, C., Mah, J.W.T. & MacFadden, M. Virtual Delivery of Parent Coaching Interventions in Early Childhood Mental Health: A Scoping Review. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-023-01597-8
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-023-01597-8