Digital tools to improve parenting behaviour in low-income settings: a mixed-methods feasibility study

Introduction Digital parenting interventions could be potentially cost-effective means for providing early child development services in low-income settings. This 5-month mixed-methods pilot study evaluated the feasibility of using Afinidata, a comprehensive Facebook Messenger-based digital parenting intervention in a remote rural setting in Latin America and explored necessary adaptations to local context. Methods The study was conducted in three provinces in the Cajamarca region, Peru, from February to July 2021. 180 mothers with children aged between 2 and 24 months and regular access to a smartphone were enrolled. Mothers were interviewed three times in-person. Selected mothers also participated in focus groups or in-depth qualitative interviews. Results Despite the rural and remote study site, 88% of local families with children between 0 and 24 months had access to internet and smartphones. Two months after baseline, 84% of mothers reported using the platform at least once, and of those, 87% rated it as useful to very useful. After 5 months, 42% of mothers were still active on the platform, with little variation between urban and rural settings. Modifications to the intervention focused on assisting mothers in navigating the platform independently and included adding a laminated booklet with general information on child development, sample activities and detailed instructions on how to self-enrol in case of lost phones. Conclusions We found high access to smartphones and the intervention was well received and used in very remote areas of Peru, suggesting that digital parenting interventions could be a promising path forward for supporting low-income families in remote parts of Latin America.

[1]  Christopher M. Westgard,et al.  An mHealth tool for community health workers to improve caregiver knowledge of child health in the Amazon: An effectiveness-implementation hybrid evaluation , 2022, PLOS global public health.

[2]  A. Yousafzai,et al.  Parenting interventions to promote early child development in the first three years of life: A global systematic review and meta-analysis , 2021, PLoS medicine.

[3]  M. Dadds,et al.  Keeping Parents Involved: Predicting Attrition in a Self-Directed, Online Program for Childhood Conduct Problems , 2018, Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53.

[4]  A. Feroz,et al.  Role of mHealth applications for improving antenatal and postnatal care in low and middle income countries: a systematic review , 2017, BMC Health Services Research.

[5]  Deborah E. White,et al.  Thematic Analysis , 2017 .

[6]  R. Prinz,et al.  A Review of Technology-Based Youth and Family-Focused Interventions , 2017, Clinical child and family psychology review.

[7]  J. Hutchings,et al.  An Evaluation of the Online Universal Programme COPING Parent: A Feasibility Study , 2017, Journal of public health research.

[8]  Chunling Lu,et al.  Early childhood development coming of age: science through the life course , 2017, The Lancet.

[9]  J. Leckman,et al.  Nurturing care: promoting early childhood development , 2017, The Lancet.

[10]  J. Wolf,et al.  Impact of a child stimulation intervention on early child development in rural Peru: a cluster randomised trial using a reciprocal control design , 2016, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[11]  Mario Chen,et al.  Evaluating Bang for the Buck , 2016 .

[12]  K. Bierman,et al.  Technology-assisted Interventions for Parents of Young Children: Emerging Practices, Current Research, and Future Directions. , 2015, Early childhood research quarterly.

[13]  F. Aboud,et al.  Global health and development in early childhood. , 2015, Annual review of psychology.

[14]  Z. Bhutta,et al.  Effect of integrated responsive stimulation and nutrition interventions in the Lady Health Worker programme in Pakistan on child development, growth, and health outcomes: a cluster-randomised factorial effectiveness trial , 2014, The Lancet.

[15]  C. Pagliari,et al.  Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for maternal, newborn and child health in low– and middle–income countries: Systematic review and meta–analysis , 2014, Journal of global health.

[16]  Susan L. Johnson,et al.  A Home‐based educational intervention to caregivers in South India to improve complementary feeding and responsive feeding, and psychosocial stimulation increases dietary intake, growth and development of infants , 2010 .

[17]  Maria E Fernandez,et al.  How we design feasibility studies. , 2009, American journal of preventive medicine.

[18]  L. Swartz,et al.  Improving quality of mother-infant relationship and infant attachment in socioeconomically deprived community in South Africa: randomised controlled trial , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[19]  S. Pocock,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. , 2007, Preventive medicine.

[20]  J. Heckman Skill Formation and the Economics of Investing in Disadvantaged Children , 2006, Science.

[21]  S. Walker,et al.  Effects of early childhood psychosocial stimulation and nutritional supplementation on cognition and education in growth-stunted Jamaican children: prospective cohort study , 2005, The Lancet.

[22]  Marta Rubio-Codina,et al.  Home visiting at scale and child development , 2021, Journal of Public Economics Plus.