3 Answers to Study Questions This study was a longitudinal follow-up to a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted to determine the effect of the Minding the Baby (MTB) home visiting program on child behavior problems and parental reflective functioning (RF). The MTB home visiting program was the intervention or independent variable implemented in this study. The child internalizing, externalizing, and total behavior problems and parental RF were the dependent variables measured in this study. Maternal depressive symptoms were also measured in this study but were not included in this exercise. The study included intervention and control groups (see Figure 1 of the sampling algorithm for the Ordway et al. (2014) study). Women with children 3–5 years of age were the population for this study. Population was defined earlier in this exercise and identified in Figure 1 . The study participants were mother–child dyads, where each mother and child pair was included as a participant. No, the study report did not include sampling exclusion criteria. Only sampling or eligibility inclusion criteria were identified. The primary study included 132 mother–child dyads (see study narrative and Figure 1 ). A total of 71 of the mother–child dyads (intervention group n = 36 and control group n = 35) met the eligibility criteria of child being 3–5 years old. A total of 26 mother–child dyads were included in the control group of the follow- up study (see Figure 1 ). Thus, 9 dyads of the original 35 in the primary study were not included in the follow-up study. The researchers clearly identified the reasons for these 9 dyads not participating in the follow-up study: four of the mother–child dyads did not meet inclusion criteria since they had moved, the child was not in custody of mother, the child aged out of the study during the recruitment period, or the child did not participate in the primary study (see Figure 1 ). Researchers were unable to contact five of the mother–child dyads. These are common and appropriate reasons for participants not taking part in a follow-up study, and the study is strengthened by a discussion of what happened to these dyads. The follow-up study had a 0% refusal rate. The mother–child dyads in the intervention group were n = 24 and in the control group were n = 26 for a total sample of 50 mother–child dyads. All mothers contacted who met the sampling criteria agreed to participate in the study and none refused.
Refusal rate = (number of subjects refusing to participate in a study ÷ by the number of potential subjects approached) × 100%. Number refusing = 150 − 125 = 25. Refusal rate = (25 refused to participate ÷ 150 potential subjects approached) × 100% = 0.1667 × 100% = 16.67% = 16.7%. 8. Graphics, such as Figure 1 , are strong additions to research reports for RCTs and quasi- experimental and experimental quantitative 3 studies to document the sampling process. This type of figure can be used to identify the number of potential subjects, indicate those meeting or not meeting sampling or eligibility criteria, refusal numbers and rates, numbers in each group, a rition numbers and rates, and final size of study groups. When reporting RCTs or quasi-experimental and experimental studies, researchers need to consider including a sampling algorithm such as Figure 1 .
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 7 pages?
- Winter '16
- Statistical hypothesis testing