4.2 Review

Controlling Parenting Behaviors in Parents of Children Born Preterm: A Meta-Analysis

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000762

Keywords

parenting; control; prematurity; low birth weight; meta-analysis

Funding

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/118495/2016]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/118495/2016] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: This meta-analysis tested whether parents of preterm-born children differ from parents of full-term-born children regarding controlling parenting. Methods: Databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, and Elton B. Stephens Company were searched for cross-sectional and prospective longitudinal studies examining controlling parenting in preterm-born children. Results: The meta-analysis included 27 independent data sets, derived from 34 studies, with a total of 8053 participants-3265 preterm and 4788 full-term children. Parents of children born preterm were more controlling than parents of children born full-term (Hedges' g = 0.29; 95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.39; z = 5.48; p < 0.001). Heterogeneity analysis indicated significant variation in effects between studies (Q = 148.46, p < 0.001), but the effects were not moderated by gestational age, birth weight, child age, child gender, parental education, type of parenting assessment method (observational vs parental self-report), parenting dimension measured (behaviors vs attitudes), type of controlling parenting (intrusiveness vs others), study design (cross-sectional vs longitudinal), year of publication, or geographical setting of the studies (America vs Europe). Conclusion: Findings suggest that parents of children born preterm are at higher risk for engaging in controlling parenting strategies, stressing the importance of psychosocial follow-up support for these parents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available