+1 Recommend
1 collections

      To submit your manuscript, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Physical, Psychological, and Socioeconomic Well-being Outcomes of Parents of Children With Neurodevelopmental Disabilities: Protocol for a Systematic Review


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          It is well recognized that parents of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities can experience a considerable burden of care associated with their child’s disability, which can potentially impact their functioning and quality of life. Historically, the intervention efforts in pediatric rehabilitation have focused primarily on the child’s development and well-being and much less on parental and family well-being. The impact that a child’s diagnosis might have on parents remains unclear, and it is unknown how we can best support parents on their journey of childhood disability. It is, therefore, important to synthesize the published evidence on interventions for parents of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities so that clinicians can be better informed about the ways in which families they work with can be supported.


          This manuscript presents the protocol for a systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions aiming to improve the physical, psychological, or socioeconomic well-being of parents of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities when compared to usual care or no care.


          We will systematically search 4 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) from the year 2000 until the search date, for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of interventions to improve parental physical, psychological, or socioeconomic well-being. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts, which will then be followed by full-text screening. After the eligibility assessment, two reviewers will independently extract data and conduct a risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We will assess the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. If the data allow, we will perform a pairwise meta-analysis or network meta-analysis. We plan to evaluate the coherence of the network with a global test by using the node-splitting method.


          As of May 30, 2022, there have been two searches of data initiated: in September 2020 for articles published since 2000 and an updated search in January 2022 for articles published since 2020. We have screened all the titles and abstracts and performed eligibility assessment. However, the final number of references is still not available due to the additional information needed for some of the potentially eligible studies. The results from this systematic review will be published in an indexed journal within a year after this protocol is published.


          This study is expected to identify a variety of programs to address the well-being needs of parents of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities and provide directions on how parents can best be supported within health care. Such interventions might help professionals and stakeholders in creating service delivery models that can enhance parental well-being and minimize the risks to their physical, psychological, and socioeconomic functioning.

          Trial Registration

          PROSPERO CRD42021230706; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=230706

          International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)


          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

            Without a complete published description of interventions, clinicians and patients cannot reliably implement interventions that are shown to be useful, and other researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. The quality of description of interventions in publications, however, is remarkably poor. To improve the completeness of reporting, and ultimately the replicability, of interventions, an international group of experts and stakeholders developed the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The process involved a literature review for relevant checklists and research, a Delphi survey of an international panel of experts to guide item selection, and a face to face panel meeting. The resultant 12 item TIDieR checklist (brief name, why, what (materials), what (procedure), who provided, how, where, when and how much, tailoring, modifications, how well (planned), how well (actual)) is an extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement (item 5) and the SPIRIT 2013 statement (item 11). While the emphasis of the checklist is on trials, the guidance is intended to apply across all evaluative study designs. This paper presents the TIDieR checklist and guide, with an explanation and elaboration for each item, and examples of good reporting. The TIDieR checklist and guide should improve the reporting of interventions and make it easier for authors to structure accounts of their interventions, reviewers and editors to assess the descriptions, and readers to use the information.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.

              The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly, authors face novel challenges for conducting and reporting their reviews. This extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement was developed specifically to improve the reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses. A group of experts participated in a systematic review, Delphi survey, and face-to-face discussion and consensus meeting to establish new checklist items for this extension statement. Current PRISMA items were also clarified. A modified, 32-item PRISMA extension checklist was developed to address what the group considered to be immediately relevant to the reporting of network meta-analyses. This document presents the extension and provides examples of good reporting, as well as elaborations regarding the rationale for new checklist items and the modification of previously existing items from the PRISMA statement. It also highlights educational information related to key considerations in the practice of network meta-analysis. The target audience includes authors and readers of network meta-analyses, as well as journal editors and peer reviewers.

                Author and article information

                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Research Protocols
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                July 2022
                28 July 2022
                : 11
                : 7
                : e38686
                [1 ] School of Rehabilitation Science McMaster University Hamilton, ON Canada
                [2 ] CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research McMaster University Hamilton, ON Canada
                [3 ] Department of Pediatrics Faculty of Health Sciences McMaster University Hamilton, ON Canada
                [4 ] Department of Occupational Therapy Sengkang General Hospital Singapore Singapore
                [5 ] Toronto Rehabilitation Institute Toronto, ON Canada
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Monika Novak-Pavlic monika.novak@ 123456outlook.com
                Author information
                ©Monika Novak-Pavlic, Peter Rosenbaum, Luciana Gazzi Macedo, Briano Di Rezze, Joshua Yong, Atefeh Noori, Debra Hughes. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 28.07.2022.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                : 13 April 2022
                : 5 May 2022
                : 9 May 2022
                : 31 May 2022

                childhood disability,developmental disability,family,health,parent intervention,pediatric,children,parenting,rehabilitation,child development,health intervention,peer support,socioeconomic well-being,parent support,meta-analysis,quality of life


                Comment on this article