Table 1
Descriptive characteristics of participants (total sample and by treatment group).
| VARIABLES | TOTAL SAMPLE (N = 288) n (%) OR M(SD) | CONTROL GROUP(N = 143) n (%) OR M (SD) | INTERVENTION GROUP(N = 145) n (%) OR M (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sociodemographic and sociocultural factors | |||
| Child’s age in months, mean (SD) | 18.84 (9.42) | 19.07 (9.29) | 18.61 (9.57) |
| Child’s gender | |||
| Female | 145 (50.3) | 74 (51.7) | 71 (49.0) |
| Male | 143 (49.7) | 69 (48.3) | 74 (51.0) |
| Parent/Caregiver’s age in years, mean (SD) | 31.23 (6.50) | 30.92 (7.19) | 31.54 (5.75) |
| Parent/Caregiver’s country of birth | |||
| English-speaking country | 208 (82.5) | 102 (82.9) | 106 (82.2) |
| Non-English-speaking country | 44 (17.5) | 21 (17.1) | 23 (17.8) |
| Parent/Caregiver’s preferred language | |||
| English | 254 (88.5) | 127 (89.4) | 127 (87.6) |
| Non-English | 33 (11.5) | 15 (10.6) | 18 (12.4) |
| CALD status# | |||
| No | 206 (81.7) | 101 (82.1) | 105 (81.4) |
| Yes | 46 (18.3) | 22 (17.9) | 24 (18.6) |
| Parent/Caregiver’s education level | |||
| Postgraduate/Graduate diploma/Bachelor’s degree | 148 (51.4) | 79 (55.2) | 69 (47.6) |
| Advanced Diploma/ Certificate III/IV | 78 (27.1) | 40 (28.0) | 38 (26.2) |
| Up to Year 12 | 62 (21.5) | 24 (16.8) | 38 (26.2) |
| Marital status | |||
| Married | 178 (62.0) | 93 (65.5) | 85 (58.6) |
| Other (De facto/Single/Divorced) | 109 (38.0) | 49 (34.5) | 60 (41.4) |
| Site | |||
| Liverpool, Fairfield, Bankstown | 61 (21.2) | 30 (21.0) | 31 (21.4) |
| Murrumbidgee | 227 (78.8) | 113 (79.0) | 114 (78.6) |
| Current service use | |||
| No | 211 (73.3) | 108 (76.1) | 103 (72.5) |
| Yes | 73 (25.3) | 34 (23.9) | 39 (27.5) |
| Clinical indicators | |||
| K10 scores at baseline | 18.47 (6.78) | 18.52 (6.82) | 18.41 (6.76) |
| No of LTSAE concerns at baseline | 0.27 (0.66) | 0.29 (0.70) | 0.26 (0.62) |
[i] #CALD status – parent’s country of birth and/or preferred language; M – Mean; SD – Standard deviation; LTSAE – Learn The Signs, Act Early; K10 – Kessler’s psychological distress scale.
Figure 1
CONSORT Study Flow Diagram.
Table 2
Differences in the number and type of unmet social needs by treatment group over time.
| WE CARE SCORES | INTERVENTION GROUPMEAN (SD) | CONTROL GROUPMEAN (SD) | MEAN DIFFERENCE (95% CI) | t STATISTIC | p-VALUE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total scores | |||||
| T0 | 1.10 (1.50) | 1.31 (1.48) | –0.22 (–0.56, 0.13) | –1.242 | 0.215 |
| T1 | 1.14 (1.77) | 1.19 (1.47) | –0.04 (–0.43, 0.35) | –0.211 | 0.833 |
| T2 | 0.95 (1.57) | 1.03 (1.29) | –0.08 (–0.45, 0.28) | –0.434 | 0.664 |
| Type of concerns | |||||
| Schooling at T0 | 0.23 (0.64) | 0.24 (0.63) | –0.01 (–0.20, 0.18) | –0.113 | 0.910 |
| Schooling at T1 | 0.16 (0.53) | 0.16 (0.49) | 0.01 (–0.15, 0.16) | 0.064 | 0.949 |
| Schooling at T2 | 0.14 (0.49) | 0.11 (0.43) | 0.03 (–0.12, 0.19) | 0.403 | 0.688 |
| Employment at T0 | 0.43 (0.79) | 0.32 (0.69) | 0.11 (–0.11, 0.33) | 0.966 | 0.335 |
| Employment at T1 | 0.36 (0.75) | 0.36 (0.72) | –0.01 (–0.23, 0.22) | –0.030 | 0.976 |
| Employment at T2 | 0.28 (0.65) | 0.25 (0.63) | 0.03 (–0.18, 0.25) | 0.350 | 0.727 |
| Help to quit smoking at T0 | 0.17 (0.55) | 0.12 (0.41) | 0.05 (–0.09, 0.20) | 0.729 | 0.467 |
| Help to quit smoking at T1 | 0.15 (0.52) | 0.16 (0.54) | –0.01 (–0.18, 0.15) | –0.217 | 0.829 |
| Help to quit smoking at T2 | 0.24 (0.63) | 0.07 (0.35) | 0.16 (–0.01, 0.33) | 1.937 | 0.055 |
| Help to quit alcohol at T0 | 0.04 (0.24) | 0.08 (0.34) | –0.04 (–0.13, 0.06) | –0.814 | 0.417 |
| Help to quit alcohol at T1 | 0.08 (0.35) | 0.08 (0.35) | –0.01 (–012, 0.11) | –0.035 | 0.972 |
| Help to quit alcohol at T2 | 0.08 (0.36) | 0.09 (0.42) | –0.01 (–0.15, 0.12) | –0.171 | 0.864 |
| Help with anxiety/depression at T0 | 0.25 (0.61) | 0.24 (0.59) | 0.01 (–0.17, 0.19) | 0.161 | 0.436 |
| Help with anxiety/depression at T1 | 0.16 (0.53) | 0.30 (0.66) | –0.14 (–0.32, 0.05) | –1.440 | 0.152 |
| Help with anxiety/depression at T2 | 0.22 (0.58) | 0.15 (0.50) | 0.07 (–0.11, 0.26) | 0.817 | 0.415 |
| Help with day care at T0 | 0.33 (0.64) | 0.28 (0.60) | 0.05 (–0.12, 0.22) | 0.603 | 0.547 |
| Help with day care at T1 | 0.24 (0.56) | 0.22 (0.52) | 0.02 (–0.13, 0.18) | 0.328 | 0.743 |
| Help with day care at T2 | 0.12 (0.38) | 0.12 (0.38) | 0.01 (–0.11, 0.12) | 0.056 | 0.955 |
| Homeless at T0 | 0.07 (0.26) | 0.06 (0.29) | 0.01 (–0.08, 0.09) | 0.207 | 0.836 |
| Homeless at T1 | 0.06 (0.24) | 0.13 (0.41) | –0.07 (–0.18, 0.04) | –1.268 | 0.207 |
| Homeless at T2 | 0.07 (0.25) | 0.06 (0.30) | 0.01 (–0.09, 0.10) | 0.086 | 0.932 |
| Food at T0 | 0.23 (0.49) | 0.22 (0.51) | 0.01 (–0.14, 0.16) | 0.116 | 0.908 |
| Food at T1 | 0.22 (0.52) | 0.30 (0.55) | –0.08 (–0.25, 0.08) | –0.972 | 0.333 |
| Food at T2 | 0.15 (0.39) | 0.25 (0.55) | –0.09 (–0.26, 0.06) | –1.245 | 0.215 |
[i] T0 – Baseline, T1 – six-months post-baseline, T2 – 12-months post-baseline.
Figure 2
Type of unmet needs at baseline by site.
Table 3
Results of the Generalised Linear Mixed Model Analyses of Time-by-Group Effects as Three-Timepoint Analysis.
| OUTCOME – WE CARE SCORE | β | SE | p-VALUE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | |||
| Treatment (Ref = Control) | –0.35 | 0.17 | 0.046 |
| Time (Ref = T0) | |||
| T1 | –0.11 | 0.11 | 0.305 |
| T2 | –0.23 | 0.11 | 0.036 |
| Time (Ref = T0) × Treatment (Ref = Control) | |||
| Time (T1) × Treatment (Intervention) | 0.17 | 0.15 | 0.257 |
| Time (T2) × Treatment (Intervention) | 0.05 | 0.15 | 0.743 |
[i] Subjects as random effects with time and group as fixed effects and adjusted for covariates: Child’s age, gender, parent’s age, education level, marital status, CALD status and site. Ref: Reference category. T0 – Baseline, T1 – six-months post-baseline, T2 – 12-months post-baseline.
Figure 3
Changes in WECARE scores by treatment and control group.