On this page:

The Independent Evaluation of 'Starting Well' Final Report

« Previous | Contents |

Listen

The Independent Evaluation of 'Starting Well' Final Report

Footnotes

1 Greater Easterhouse is used here as a shorthand for the following areas since the project did not cover Greater Easterhouse in its entirety: Cranhill, Ruchazie, Craigend, Garthamlock, Easterhouse and Gartloch.

2 Health visitors stated that postnatal tiredness and a lack of time were very common reasons for not opting into the study.

3 See also the website http://www.ualr.edu/~crtldept/home4.htm,

4 At the time of writing, 73 participants had either voluntarily withdrawn from the study (N=26) or moved without leaving a forwarding address (N=47). Opt-ins who could not be contacted for at least one assessment were not included in analyses in order to maximise the number of predictor variables available for modelling.

5 The contested nature of community development (Popple, 2001) is discussed more fully within the body of the report.

6 Greater Easterhouse is used here as a shorthand for the following areas since the project did not cover Greater Easterhouse in its entirety: Cranhill, Ruchazie, Craigend, Garthamlock, Easterhouse and Gartloch.

7 Because of the wide range of the evaluation and the methods that it utilises, the description of methods that is provided within this section is relatively brief. Where more detailed technical descriptions of particular aspects of the evaluation exist elsewhere they are referenced rather than replicated in full.

8 predominantly the North Glasgow LHCC, including Springburn and Possil. Lower than expected recruitment rates here necessitated extension of the comparison area to encompass two further LHCCs in the west of Glasgow (Drumchapel and Clydebank)

9 40% of which were comparison area births, 60% intervention births.

10 Health visitors stated that postnatal tiredness and a lack of time were very common reasons for not opting into the study.

11 At the time of writing, 73 participants had either voluntarily withdrawn from the study (N=26) or moved without leaving a forwarding address (N=47). Opt-ins who could not be contacted for at least one assessment were not included in the analysis in order to maximise the number of predictor variables available for modelling.

12 as assessed by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, Cox, Holden and Sagovsky, 1987 (Appendix III)

13 Analysis for all qualitative data was analysed as follows. All interviews and focus groups were tape-recorded, transcribed in full and analysed using either ATLAS -ti or N5 (Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software packages). Transcripts were coded for both a priori themes outlined in the interview schedules and themes emerging from the data. Data were analysed thematically using constant comparative techniques.

Quotations have been selected to illustrate the range of views on a given theme. The participant codes have been removed from quotations since these may render respondents identifiable. Where the names of persons or place appear in the data these have been replaced with the word "Person" or "Place" to preserve anonymity. Where views are believed by the researcher to be extreme or unique, this is signalled in the text. Some quotations are shortened (this is indicated by the presence of the following punctuation within the quoted text: …); this shortening indicates that aspects of the quotation are either irrelevant to the issue that is being discussed, repetitive or unintelligible.

14 Of the seven women not interviewed a second time, three were contacted but failed to attend successive appointments and four could not be contacted.

15 14 health-visitors took part in at least one interview, some providing more than one case.

16 For an exception, see Elkan et al (2000) which contains a selective review of the British literature

17 as defined by whole or part postcode sectors. See appendix IV for a comparative contextual description.

18 As part of the UK's immigration and asylum policy, several hundred families of asylum-seekers were 'dispersed' (temporarily settled) to the area covered by the Northern LHCC during the study recruitment period. Births to these families could not be included due to variations in the developing health visiting service and to lack of interpreting support.

19 Appendix IV describes an approximation of the main comparison area comprised of whole postcode sectors.

20 Here, and in the rest of the section, this refers to Greater Glasgow NHS Board Child Health Information Team

21 Note these figures include births to families who transferred out of the area before they could be approached for consent and therefore differ slightly to those published in previous outputs that did not consider these to be 'eligible' births.

22 In practice, missing values for some predictor variables further restricted the number of cases available for analysis. This explains the reduction in N in some regression tables below.

23 In fact, all minority participants live in the southern project area, in a well-established Scottish Asian community largely composed of first, second and third generation Pakistani Muslims. Disclosure concerns prevent release of 2001 Census ethnicity data at small-areas levels (e.g. postcode sector), however, just over two (2.2) percent of all households in the city are headed by people of this ethnicity (General Register Office (Scotland), 2003).

24 This is confirmed by contextual comparisons of area-level material resources (see Appendix IV).

25 Note that additional outcomes (e.g. maternal self-esteem, functional support, parenting confidence) are not included here both for reasons of parsimony and the fact that they tap similar dimensions to the chosen measures (e.g. EPDS and self-esteem; HOME score and parenting confidence).

26 Due to differing skills, emphases, training, etc, it is not easy to confidently state that one health visitor home contact has the same therapeutic significance as one health support worker or one nursery nurse contact. For these reasons, visits by these health professionals were not included in analyses.

27 This is only true for comparisons across models (e.g. 6- and 18-month assessments), to the extent that the same predictors are entered with similar sample sizes.

28 'NS-SEC class 8' classifies respondents as never having worked or being long-term unemployed

29 Actual c 2 statistics and degrees of freedom available on request.

30 Significant positive intervention effects are also observed with the other two measures described in table 2.11 but are not reported for reasons of space.

31 Interestingly, given the prominence of Olds' work in the initial design of the project, only three studies (Olds et al 1986; 1994; Kitzman et al, 1997) use the HOME as an outcome. Only one (Kitzman et al) shows significant intervention effects but in relation to a highly selective sample of disadvantaged African-American primiparous mothers who had given birth to very premature infants (<29 weeks gestation).

32 A number of studies in the HTA review (e.g. Larson, 1980; Black et al, 1995) report findings that are only just significant at the p=0.05 level, whilst others (e.g. Black et al, 1994) just fail to reach this level.

33 As both HOME and EPDS were collected at the same assessment, it is difficult to make causal statements regarding their inter-relationship.

34 A similar conclusion was reached in a recent British study by Davies, Howells and Jenkins (2003) which involved repeated EPDS screenings over the first postnatal year. Here 'new' cases were often women who had moved into the practice area and had not been screened previously. This could not be a factor in our study but the finding that the number of significant life-events predicted high scores at eighteen months could point to the aetiology of depressed mood amongst this 'late-onset' group.

35 As a corollary, a recent qualitative study of parents of pre-school children in three Scottish NHS Boards (including Greater Glasgow) described the many perceived barriers to registration, including confusion as to the appropriate age to do so, parental fear, hostile attitudes to staff, accessibility issues and lack of information and incentives to attend (Morrison, Macpherson and Binnie, 2000). Future qualitative work might explore the extent to which the observed gains in intervention areas are attributable to challenging these attitudes.

36 The practice of articulating a project's Theory of Change, however, throws up a serious of further practical and conceptual challenges for the evaluator (Barnes et al, 2003; Mackenzie and Blamey, in press; Mackenzie and Benzeval, in preparation).

37 In practice more home visits are often delivered. In the quasi-experimental study comparison group, the median number of home visits to six months (i.e. an intermediate point between the two interviews) was 3 with range 0-16. The capacity to deliver these visits is however, severely limited by caseload size and tends to be focussed on the very vulnerable.

38 Several health visitors noted that this often meant that input increased over time, meaning that the scheduled decrease in visit frequency did not always occur. This exacerbated already-heavy workloads (see next section).

39 Copies of the Family Health Plan available on request.

40 This evaluation was not commissioned to look in detail at the effectiveness of these individual tools in changing practice; rather it aimed to focus on general lessons concerning changing practice. Various pieces of evaluation commissioned internally by the Starting Well team focus on specific tools of practice.

41 The joint working between health visitors and health support workers is discussed in section 5.3.

42 The issues that arise where these boundaries are not maintained are discussed further in 3.3.3.3

43 This is a small number of examples of good practice undertaken at a local level and is not an exhaustive list.

44 Digitised boundary data obtained from the UKBORDERS service: http://www.ukborders.ac.uk

45 Further details can be obtained from the project team.

46 see definitions in section 2.2.1, page 14.

47 in analyses not shown, this sub-sample of comparison families were found to be non-significantly less affluent than the 'full' cohort

48 for example, those composing the 'additional' recruitment areas of Drumchapel and Clydebank

49 All 2001 Census data was downloaded from the General Register of Scotland's 'Scottish Census Results On-Line' (SCROL), accessed at http://www.scrol.gov.uk.

50This latter statistic seems at odds with the impact study finding that the intervention cohort are more disadvantaged than the comparison cohort. This may be due, however, to the fact that the census data refers to parents with dependent children of all ages; parents of the youngest children may compose a more disadvantaged sub-group.

51 compared to a Glasgow City figure of 31.5% and a Scottish figure of 14.7% (GRO(Scotland), 2004)

52 for example a higher proportion of NS-SEC Class 8 residents in the intervention area but better women's self-reported health in the comparison area

« Previous | Contents |

Page updated: Thursday, March 24, 2005