Estimating Surveillance Bias in Child Maltreatment Reporting During Home Visiting Program Involvement.

It is unclear if surveillance bias (increased reports to Child Protective Services [CPS] related to program involvement) has a substantial impact on evaluation of home visiting (HV) prevention programs. We estimated surveillance bias using data from Connecticut's HV program, birth certificates, CPS, and hospitals. Using propensity score matching, we identified 15,870 families similar to 4015 HV families. The difference-in-differences approach was used to estimate surveillance bias as the change in investigated reports from the last 6 months of program involvement to the next 6 months. The median age of the children at program exit was 1.2 years (range: 60 days, 5 years). We estimated that 25.6% of investigated reports in the HV group resulted from surveillance bias. We reviewed CPS reports of 194 home-visited families to determine if a home visitor made the report and found that 10% were directly from home visitors. Program evaluations should account for surveillance bias.

Using probabilistic record linkage and propensity-score matching to identify a community-based comparison population.

In retrospective cohort studies of interventions disseminated to communities, it is challenging to find comparison groups with high-quality data for evaluation. We present one methodological approach as part of our study of birth outcomes of second-born children in a home visiting (HV) program targeting first-time mothers. We used probabilistic record linkage to link Connecticut's Nurturing Families Network (NFN) HV program and birth-certificate data for children born from 2005 to 2015. We identified two potential comparison groups: a propensity-score-matched group from the remaining birth certificate sample and eligible-but-unenrolled families. An analysis of interpregnancy interval (IPI) is presented to exemplify the approach. We identified the birth certificates of 4822 NFN families. The propensity-score-matched group had 14,219 families (3-to-1 matching) and we identified 1101 eligible-but-unenrolled families. Covariates were well balanced for the propensity-score-matched group, but poorly balanced for the eligible-but-unenrolled group. No program effect on IPI was found. By combining propensity-score matching and probabilistic record linkage, we were able to retrospectively identify relatively large comparison groups for quasi-experimental research. Using birth certificate data, we accessed outcomes for all of these individuals from a single data source. Multiple comparison groups allow us to confirm findings when each method has some limitations. Other researchers seeking community-based comparison groups could consider a similar approach.

Birth-Related Outcomes for Second Children Following Home Visiting Program Enrollment for New Parents of First Children.

INTRODUCTION: Home visiting (HV) programs aim to promote child and family health through perinatal intervention. HV may benefit second children through improving subsequent pregnancy and birth outcomes. However, HV impacts on birth outcomes of second children have not been examined in a naturalistic setting. METHODS: Using data from Connecticut Nurturing Families Network (NFN) home visiting program of families enrolled from 2005 to 2015, we compared birth-related outcomes (birthweight, preterm birth, Cesarean section delivery, prenatal care utilization) of second children (n = 1758) to demographically similar propensity-score-matched families that were not enrolled in NFN (n = 5200). We examined whether the effects of NFN differed by maternal age, race and ethnicity, or visit attendance pattern. RESULTS: There was no program effect for the full sample. The effect of NFN did not differ by maternal age or visit attendance pattern but did differ by maternal race and ethnicity. Black women in NFN were more likely to receive adequate prenatal care during their second pregnancy (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.01, 1.09) and Hispanic women in NFN were less likely to deliver by Cesarean section for their second birth (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.94, 0.99), compared to Black and Hispanic women in the comparison group respectively. There was a protective program effect on prematurity of the second child (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.85, 0.996) for women with a preterm first birth. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that benefits of HV extend to subsequent birth-related outcomes for women from marginalized racial/ethnic groups. HV may help buffer some harmful social determinants of health.