Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Jul 16:9:671988.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.671988. eCollection 2021.

Supporting Child Development Through Parenting Interventions in Low- to Middle-Income Countries: An Updated Systematic Review

Linlin Zhang  1 , Derrick Ssewanyana  2 , Marie-Claude Martin  2 , Stephen Lye  2 , Greg Moran  3 , Amina Abubakar  4 , Kofi Marfo  4 , Joyce Marangu  4 , Kerrie Proulx  2 , Tina Malti  5   6
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Supporting Child Development Through Parenting Interventions in Low- to Middle-Income Countries: An Updated Systematic Review

Linlin Zhang et al. Front Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Over 250 million children in low- and middle-income countries are at risk of not achieving their fullest developmental potential due to co-occurring risks such as poor nutrition and inadequate learning opportunities. Early intervention programs integrating the aspects of nurturing care, that is, good health, adequate nutrition, safety and security, responsive caregiving, and learning opportunities, may ameliorate against the negative impact of these adverse conditions. Methods: This meta-analytic review updates the evidence base of parenting interventions comprising stimulation and responsive caregiving components on developmental outcomes for children under age 2 years in low- and middle-income countries. It also describes and assesses the moderation effects of population characteristics and implementation features on the intervention effectiveness. Studies were identified based on previous systematic reviews and an updated literature search in eight databases and the gray literature up to December 2020. A random-effect model was used to explore the pooled effect sizes accounted for by the intervention for developmental outcome of cognition, language, motor, and social-emotional capacities. Exploratory moderation analyses were also conducted. Results: Twenty-one randomized controlled trials representing over 10,400 children from 12 low- and middle-income countries and regions across three continents (Africa, Latin America, and Asia) were identified. The interventions showed overall small-to-moderate effects on children's cognitive development (ES = 0.44; 95% CI = [0.30, 0.57]); language development (ES = 0.33; 95% CI = [0.18, 0.49]); and motor skills (ES = 0.21; 95% CI = [0.10, 0.32]). The overall effect on social-emotional development was non-significant (ES = 0.17; 95% CI = [-0.01, 0.34]). Effect sizes (ES) varied significantly across the studies. Parenting programs that targeted vulnerable groups, including rural communities and caregivers with lower education levels, had more significant effects on children's development. Group sessions (vs. individual visits) and high program dose (≥12 sessions) were also associated with stronger effects on child development. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of the workforce and training on programmatic outcomes. Conclusion: The findings indicate that parenting interventions that encourage nurturing care are effective in improving the early development of children, especially among vulnerable populations. We discuss opportunities to strengthen the implementation of research-based parenting interventions in such contexts.

Keywords: early childhood development; low- and middle-income countries; parenting intervention; stimulation; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart showing the selection of studies.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Effect sizes on Cognitive outcomes.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Effect sizes on Language outcomes.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Effect sizes on Motor outcomes.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Effect sizes on Socio-emotional outcomes.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Black MM, Walker SP, Fernald LC, Andersen CT, DiGirolamo AM, Lu C, et al. . Early childhood development coming of age: science through the life course. Lancet. (2017) 389:77–90. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31389-7 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Daelmans B, Darmstadt GL, Lombardi J, Black MM, Britto PR, Lye S, et al. . Early childhood development: the foundation of sustainable development. Lancet. (2017) 389:9–11. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31659-2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Heckman JJ. Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science. (2006) 312:1900–2. 10.1126/science.1128898 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Leckman JF, Britto PR. Steps toward peace and violence prevention across generations: the potential of early child development in the context of the 2030 sustainable development goals. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev. (2018) 2018:5–12. 10.1002/cad.20227 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cusick SE, Georgieff MK. The role of nutrition in brain development: the golden opportunity of the “first 1000 days”. J Pediatr. (2016) 175:16–21. 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.05.013 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types