Sentences with phrase «following the intervention period»

Assessments of language and joint attention were conducted at 3 time points — baseline, immediately following Intervention period 2, and three months after Intervention period 2.

Not exact matches

The increased socioeconomic inequalities in breastfeeding observed in the intervention group supports the argument that population intervention strategies could inadvertently exacerbate, rather than mitigate, socioeconomic inequalities, particularly when the intervention aims to change individual behaviours rather than targeting «upstream» structural changes.25 Our results are also compatible with an observational study from Brazil reporting that breastfeeding rates increased first among the socioeconomically better - off, followed by increases among the poor, over a 20 - year period of active breastfeeding promotion campaigns in Brazil.26

Intervention: pregnant women «were asked in the antenatal period to identify a close female confidante who could support them to breastfeed following the birth of their babies».

For instance, the study of Mattar et al. revealed a marginal increase in EB at six months after delivery among the group which received a prenatal educational intervention highlighting the benefits as well as the management of breastfeeding issues as the main content of the educational material (booklet), video, coaching session and counselling, compared to the group receiving only the booklet and the video, and the one recipient of only routine prenatal care, concluding that that educational material alone in the prenatal period is not enough and that specific prenatal education that addresses breastfeeding following a single meeting through counselling can significantly improve

A further 13 women were lost to follow - up during the intervention period.

«Longitudinal studies following children into adulthood are needed to further understand at which point exposure translates to inflammatory and metabolic changes in order to capitalize on a potentially impactful period for primary intervention.»

The three - month period following stroke is considered the most critical for medical intervention.

However, registration of cardiac arrests was prospective and uniform, following the standardized Utstein style for reporting out - of - hospital cardiac arrest and revised for data quality assurance by the RACE - CARS team.18 Our results support efforts of other communities seeking to improve bystander and first - responder intervention, since they come from a quality - improvement database of a substantial portion of the state of North Carolina, with stable reporting over a 4 - year period during a broad implementation program that used a standardized protocol, as recommended by the American Heart Association.13, 20,40

Following a period of intensive meditation, genes involved with the infectious cycle may get downregulated along with related host genes regulating protein synthesis, an explanation that is supported by other stress reduction interventions that have shown increased innate antiviral activity, such as upregulated Type 1 interferon activity.40 Shorter telomeres in population - based studies have been predictive of earlier onset of chronic diseases of aging, including diabetes, 41 cardiovascular disease9 and certain cancers.42

Background Time - restricted feeding (TRF) is a novel dietary intervention that involves eating in a narrow time period (typically < 9 hours), followed by a ≥ 15 - hour daily fast.

Those who swear by it frequently invoke the results of Project Follow Through, the largest and most expensive educational research study ever mounted by the federal government, which compared the outcomes of over twenty different educational interventions in high - poverty communities over a multiyear period.

For students not reaching the national benchmark, the panel says checks could be carried out again towards the end of Term 4 of Year 1 «following a period of up to 14 weeks further teaching and / or intervention».

Following a SIG grant - funded year of organizational preparation, CEC's SIG interventions become systemic and represent a highly intensive, integrated and transformative approach over a subsequent four - year grant - determined period.

Over a 30 - year period, researchers followed two groups of children — one enrolled at the center; the other from randomly selected early childhood intervention programs — and found that those who took part in the center's field trips and focused reading and math instruction were more likely to get a college degree than their peers who did not.

The Aspetuck Angel Fund will assist with treatment costs if all three of the following conditions are met: It is the assessment of an AAH veterinarian that the pet is to enjoy a good to excellent quality of life for a reasonable period of time as a result of the intervention.

Following a period of intervention and review of progress, a decision is made as to the appropriate level of support required by the student.

To assess the effectiveness of the intervention, paper - pencil self - report surveys were collected from students three times during the study period: baseline, plus two follow up surveys at 6 and 18 months after baseline.

You might want to try the following interventions for a period of about 6 weeks.

Upon completion of the 12 - week intervention period, all participants were invited to complete a follow - up assessment.

Researchers make every reasonable effort to follow each participant for the entire study period, recognising the importance of retention in maintaining the sample size, generalisability and comparability between the groups randomised to the intervention programme or usual care.

Care managers followed up with patients during the 6 - month intervention period, coordinated care with the primary care clinician, assisted the clinician in patient management, delivered the CBT, and incorporated CBT components into briefer follow - up contacts.

These findings demonstrating enhanced child and parent benefits associated with collaborative care extend those reported in quality improvement interventions for child behavior problems, 13,14 ADHD, 6 — 8 adolescent depression, 10,11 and other problems.5 In the follow - up period, EUC showed significantly greater remission since posttreatment in behavior problems than DOCC, which may reflect DOCC patients having achieved greater remission by the end of treatment.

However, it was noted that the mean Eyberg Intensity scores of the 21 intervention group children whose initial scores fell in the clinical range decreased by 26.1 points from preintervention to six month follow up (p < 0.001) and that those of the 39 children initially scoring in the normal range decreased by 9.2 points (p = 0.002) over this period.

The absence of significant findings at 12 months was mainly due to the fact that between the 6 and 12 month follow up periods, the scores of the control group improved, while the scores of the intervention group remained similar to those obtained at 6 months.

As we follow up this sample into preadolescence, we will be able to evaluate the clinical relevance of intervention - induced changes in the HPA system, child social behavior, and the family environment in the preschool period for later psychiatric disorders.

First, the few studies that have followed participants beyond the immediate intervention period (6 months or less) have noted a decay of intervention effect on behavior over time, 5,6 prompting members of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Panel: Intervention to Prevent HIV Risk Behavior to identify sustainability of program effectiveness as 1 of the most important questions that professionals who are concerned with risk prevention face.7 A challenge for behavioral change interventions in general, this issue is particularly vexing for interventions that target decreased involvement in sex and substance use with advancing age during adolescence.8, 9 Second, multiple behaviors (sex without a condom, sex with multiple partners, substance use before sex, etc) directly and indirectly place individuals at risk for acquisiintervention period (6 months or less) have noted a decay of intervention effect on behavior over time, 5,6 prompting members of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Panel: Intervention to Prevent HIV Risk Behavior to identify sustainability of program effectiveness as 1 of the most important questions that professionals who are concerned with risk prevention face.7 A challenge for behavioral change interventions in general, this issue is particularly vexing for interventions that target decreased involvement in sex and substance use with advancing age during adolescence.8, 9 Second, multiple behaviors (sex without a condom, sex with multiple partners, substance use before sex, etc) directly and indirectly place individuals at risk for acquisiintervention effect on behavior over time, 5,6 prompting members of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Panel: Intervention to Prevent HIV Risk Behavior to identify sustainability of program effectiveness as 1 of the most important questions that professionals who are concerned with risk prevention face.7 A challenge for behavioral change interventions in general, this issue is particularly vexing for interventions that target decreased involvement in sex and substance use with advancing age during adolescence.8, 9 Second, multiple behaviors (sex without a condom, sex with multiple partners, substance use before sex, etc) directly and indirectly place individuals at risk for acquisiIntervention to Prevent HIV Risk Behavior to identify sustainability of program effectiveness as 1 of the most important questions that professionals who are concerned with risk prevention face.7 A challenge for behavioral change interventions in general, this issue is particularly vexing for interventions that target decreased involvement in sex and substance use with advancing age during adolescence.8, 9 Second, multiple behaviors (sex without a condom, sex with multiple partners, substance use before sex, etc) directly and indirectly place individuals at risk for acquisition of HIV.

Patients had to fulfil the following criteria: a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective psychosis, or delusional disorder according to criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd edition, revised11; no evidence of organic brain disease; substance abuse not identified as the primary problem; age between 18 and 65 years; presence of persistent hallucinations or delusions, or both, for a minimum of 6 months and at least 1 month of stabilisation if they had experienced an exacerbation during this period; stable medication; no psychological or family intervention; their responsible medical officer had given permission for them to enter the study; no serious threat of violence towards the assessors; and they had given informed consent to participate.

Linear mixed - methods models were used to examine the effect of the intervention on each outcome and accounted for nesting of the intervention effects within the four follow - up time periods (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months).

In this way, following a period of intervention, some students may no longer require additional teaching supports, some may require the same level, while others may require more intensive supports.

Significant differences were not found between the intervention and comparison group on children's behaviors by the end of the follow - up period for this study.

The interventions examined are Preparing for the Drug - Free Years Program (PDFY)[now called Guiding Good Choices], the Iowa Strengthening Families Program (ISFP), and a minimal - contact control condition on trajectories of substance initiation over a period of 6 years following a baseline assessment.

Parents of 32 children (55.2 %) responded at all measurement point (baseline, post-test and follow - up) and analyses showed that child conduct problems continued to decrease during the 18 - month period after the intervention whereas parenting skills deteriorated somewhat from post treatment.

Following the baseline and pre-treatment assessments, families participated in the intervention for 2 weeks, providing a direct comparison to the 2 - week baseline period.

Other autism intervention trials, such as Kasari et al. (2015) and Estes et al. (2014), have reported positive effects on parenting stress, but with a much shorter follow - up periods and with a specific focus on parenting stress, rather than general mental health and wellbeing.

The results of multivariate modeling indicated that caregivers reporting high levels of perceived caregiving stress (i.e., depression, low parenting satisfaction, daily hassles) participated at a higher rate in two critical components (feedback and follow - up support interventions) of the FCU program over the 8 - year trial period than caregivers reporting lesser degrees of stress.