Digital Parenting Program: Enhancing Parenting and Reducing Child Behavior Problems
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Design
2.2. Sample
2.3. Ethical Aspects
2.4. Instruments and Measures
- Participant Sociodemographic Characterization Questionnaire: the questionnaire includes sociodemographic information about participants (e.g., age, family income, education level). The Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale [19,20] was used to characterize food insecurity situations. The scale was validated, and the cut-off point for food insecurity, according to the instrument’s guidelines, is one point, which means answering ‘yes’ to at least one question [20]. In the current research, the levels of food insecurity were not analyzed, only the dichotomous classification (presence or absence of food insecurity); therefore, three questions of the short version were used (“In the last three months, have you been concerned that the food in your house would run out before you had the means to buy, receive, or produce more food?”; “In the last three months, has the food run out before you had the money to buy more?”; “In the last three months, have you ever eaten less than you thought you should because there was not enough money to buy food?”). The parents or caregivers indicated for each statement: yes, no, or I do not know/prefer not to answer. Each yes response scores one point.
- Parenting and Family Adjustment Scale (PAFAS) [21], Brazilian version [22]. The cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version included back-translation and an assessment of content validity for the instrument, followed by a confirmatory factor analysis, which demonstrated an adequate model fit, indicating that 14 items could be grouped into four subscales of the Parenting Scale [22]. The present study used the following two subscales of the Parenting Scale according to the Brazilian version, totaling seven items: Coercive Practices (4 items, ranging from 0 to 12), in which a higher score indicates more dysfunctional educational practices, and Positive Encouragement (3 items, ranging from 0 to 9), in which a higher score indicates better parenting practices. Each item is rated on a scale of the statement’s truth degree: 0 (Not at all), 1 (A little—some of the time), 2 (Quite—a good part of the time), and 3 (A lot—most of the time). The original English version showed satisfactory construct and predictive validity with a sample from Australia, demonstrating internal consistency indicators (H coefficient), of 0.78 for Coercive Parenting, and 0.75 for Positive Encouragement [21]. The PAFAS Brazilian version has been previously used in studies evaluating other parenting programs [14,15].
- Parenting Sense of Competence Scale (PSOC) [23], Brazilian Version: The scale used was the version adapted by Frontiers of Innovation (FOI) and translated by Linhares and Gaspardo [24]. This study used the satisfaction subscale, which includes nine questions on caregivers’ satisfaction with parenting [25,26]. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale (from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree”). The subscale total score can range from 9 to 36 points (sum of items), in which a higher score indicates more parental satisfaction. The instrument’s internal consistency for the Satisfaction subscale (English version) was 0.80 in a sample of Canadian mothers [25]. In a Brazilian study using a similar but differently translated version of the PSOC, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.75 for the satisfaction scale [27]. The PSOC FOI Brazilian version, used in the present study, has been previously used in studies evaluating other parenting programs [14,15,16].
- Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) [28], translated into Portuguese and adapted to Brazilian sociocultural characteristics by Fleitlich, Córtazar, and Goodman [29]. The psychometric data on validity and reliability for the Brazilian version were described by Woerner et al. [30]. The SDQ is a screening questionnaire for child mental health problems that evaluates child behavior. The present study used subscales related to prosocial behavior and externalizing behavior problems (conduct problems and hyperactivity), totaling 15 items. The parents or caregivers indicate whether the statement is false, somewhat true, or true for each item. Responses are scored as zero, one, and two points, and for each scale, points are summed. Higher scores on the externalizing behavior problems subscale indicate more behavioral issues, while higher scores on the prosocial behavior scale signify more positive behaviors. A confirmatory factor analysis of the SDQ with a Brazilian sample demonstrated a satisfactory overall model fit and internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha of 0.74 for externalizing behavior problems [31]. The SDQ Brazilian version has been previously used in studies evaluating other parenting programs [13,15].
- Satisfaction and Engagement Questionnaire (developed by the authors). A self-reported instrument that evaluates participant engagement and satisfaction with the program. The first five items evaluate participant engagement with the program content (e.g., reading the messages, watching the videos, completing activities) using a 4-point Likert scale (from “Never” to “Always”). Participants then rate their satisfaction with each topic covered by the program (e.g., Child behavior and emotions and ethnic-racial relations and racism) using a 5-point Likert scale (from “Not at all interesting” to “Very interesting”).
2.5. Procedure
- Intervention: The “Born Learning” Program is a strategy aimed at supporting the development of children in families experiencing social vulnerability, which was developed and implemented with families by the United Way team (https://unitedwaybrasil.org.br/quem-somos/no-brasil/#no-brasil; accessed on 1 August 2023). The intervention was delivered mainly remotely via WhatsApp groups over five months, with two face-to-face meetings in each municipality (one at the beginning and one at the end). The topics covered included children’s rights, the role of the family, children’s physical and mental health, healthy eating, child behavior, the importance of play, violence against children, and income generation. Each week, the intervention delivered text messages and audio and video messages on various topics. Parents received comprehensive multimedia support, including two videos per week (40 total), one weekly audio pill (20 total), and daily content messages on weekdays (100 total). The WhatsApp group remained active with daily messages from Monday to Friday and was mediated by a trained facilitator and a psychologist who interacted with the participants.
- Data Collection and Analysis: The present study was conducted in 2023. Families were invited to voluntarily participate in the “Born Learning” Program through schools and philanthropic foundations that the children attend. After the invitation, families filled out an online term of interest and registration for participation in the “Born Learning” Program. From the analysis of spreadsheets with data from the records of parents and caregivers participating in the “Born Learning” Program conducted by United Way, families with complete data were selected and invited to participate in the present research. United Way informed participants that researchers would contact them by phone for program evaluation. The interview was optional and took place voluntarily by parents and caregivers who were told that it would not interfere with their participation in the “Born Learning” Program if they did not feel comfortable answering the questionnaire.
3. Results
3.1. Sample Characteristics
3.2. Parenting Practices and Parental Satisfaction
3.3. Child Behavior
3.4. Engagement and Satisfaction
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jeong, J.; Franchet, E.E.; Ramos de Oliveira, C.V.; Rehmani, K.; Yousafzai, A.K. Parenting interventions to promote early child development in the first three years of life: A global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2021, 18, e1003602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Britto, P.R.; Lye, S.J.; Proulx, K.; Yousafzai, A.K.; Matthews, S.G.; Vaivada, T.; Perez-Escamilla, R.; Rao, N.; Ip, P.; Fernald, L.C.H.; et al. Nurturing care: Promoting early childhood development. Lancet 2017, 389, 91–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Zhai, F. Spanking and parental verbal aggression during early childhood: Association with later academic achievement and the mediating role of executive function. Infant Child Dev. 2023, 32, e2446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNICEF. Designing Parenting Programmes for Violence Prevention: A Guidance Note. Available online: https://www.unicef.org/media/77866/file/Parenting-Guidance-Note.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2024).
- Florean, I.S.; Dobrean, A.; Păsărelu, C.R.; Georgescu, R.D.; Milea, I. The efficacy of internet-based parenting programs for children and adolescents with behavior problems: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 2020, 23, 510–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Harris, M.; Andrews, K.; Gonzalez, A.; Prime, H.; Atkinson, L. Technology-assisted parenting interventions for families experiencing social disadvantage: A meta-analysis. Prev. Sci. 2020, 21, 714–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spencer, C.M.; Topham, G.L.; King, E.L. Do Online Parenting Programs Create Change? A Meta-Analysis. J. Fam. Psychol. 2020, 34, 364–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Solís-Cordero, K.; Duarte, L.S.; Fujimori, E. Effectiveness of remotely delivered parenting programs on caregiver-child interaction and child development: A systematic review. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2022, 31, 3026–3036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Skeen, S.; Marlow, M.; du Toit, S.; Melendez-Torres, G.J.; Mudekunye, L.; Mapalala, E.; Ngoma, K.; Ntanda, B.M.; Maketha, M.; Grieve, C.; et al. Using WhatsApp support groups to promote responsive caregiving, caregiver mental health and child development in the COVID-19 era: A randomised controlled trial of a fully digital parenting intervention. Digit. Health 2023, 9, 20552076231203893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sanders, M.R.; Turner, K.M.; Metzler, C.W. Applying self-regulation principles in the delivery of parenting interventions. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 2019, 22, 24–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, Q.; Buchanan, G.; Simenec, T.; Lee, S.K.; Basha, S.A.; Gewirtz, A.H. Enhancing engagement in parenting programs: A comparative study of in-person, online, and telehealth formats. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2024, 162, 107686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brentani, A.; Walker, S.; Chang-Lopez, S.; Grisi, S.; Powell, C.; Fink, G. A home visit-based early childhood stimulation programme in Brazil—A randomized controlled. trial. Health Policy Plan. 2021, 36, 288–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Altafim, E.R.P.; Linhares, M.B.M. Preventive intervention for strengthening effective parenting practices: A randomized controlled trial. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2019, 62, 160–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lotto, C.R.; Altafim, E.R.P.; Linhares, M.B.M. Feasibility and acceptability study of the online ACT-Raising Safe Kids program. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2022, 141, 106591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linhares, M.B.M.; Altafim, E.R.; Gaspardo, C.M.; de Oliveira, R.C. A personalized remote video-feedback universal parenting program: A randomized controlled trial. Psychosoc. Interv. 2022, 31, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Solís-Cordero, K.; Marinho, P.; Camargo, P.; Takey, S.; Lerner, R.; Ponczek, V.P.; Filgueiras, A.; Landeira-Fernandez, J.; Fujimori, E. Effects of an online play-based parenting program on child development and the quality of caregiver-child interaction: A randomized controlled trial. Child Youth Care Forum 2023, 52, 935–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- United Way Brasil. Relatório Anual 2023 [Annual Report 2023]. 2023. Available online: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oTyKlHbQmUokcS3BbdHg3RR1bT8ZS8rc/view (accessed on 6 June 2024).
- United Way Brasil. Relatório de atividades da United Way Brasil 2021 [United Way Brasil 2021 Activities Report]. 2021. Available online: https://cdn.uwb.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Relatorio-Anual-de-atividades-da-UWB.pdf (accessed on 6 June 2024).
- Sardinha, L.M.V. Escala Brasileira de Insegurança Alimentar—EBIA: Análise Psicométrica de Uma Dimensão da Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional [Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale—EBIA: Psychometric Analysis of a Dimension of Food and Nutritional Security]; Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Combate à Fome: Brasília, Brazil, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- dos Santos, L.P.; Lindemann, I.L.; dos Santos Motta, J.V.; Mintem, G.; Bender, E.; Gigante, D.P. Proposal of a short-form version of the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale. Rev. Saude Publica 2014, 48, 783–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sanders, M.R.; Morawska, A.; Haslam, D.M.; Filus, A.; Fletcher, R. Parenting and Family Adjustment Scales (PAFAS): Validation of a brief parent-report measure for use in assessment of parenting skills and family relationships. Child Psychiatry Hum. Dev. 2014, 45, 255–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Correia, L.L.; Altafim, E.R.P.; Ferreira, P.R.S.; Gracioli, S.M.A.; Santana, L.R.; Linhares, M.B.M. Parenting and family adjustment scales: Brazilian culture adaptation. Estud. Psicol. 2024, in press.
- Gibaud-Wallston, J.; Wandersman, L.P. Development and Utility of the Parenting Sense of Competence Scale. In Proceedings of the Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, ON, Canada, 30 August 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Linhares, M.B.M.; Gaspardo, C.M. Portuguese (Brazil) Translation of Parenting Sense of Competence Scale; Frontiers of Innovation: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Ohan, J.L.; Leung, D.W.; Johnston, C. The Parenting Sense of Competence scale: Evidence of a stable factor structure and validity. Can. J. Behav. Sci. 2000, 32, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suwansujarid, T.; Vatanasomboon, P.; Gaylord, N.; Lapvongwatana, P. Validation of the parenting sense of competence scale in fathers: Thai version. Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2013, 44, 916. [Google Scholar]
- Moura, D.; de Sousa, E.M.P.; Santos, W.S.; de Holanda Sousa, S.L. Parental Sense of Competence Scale (PSOC): Validity and accuracy evidence in a Brazilian Context. Rev Psicol. 2020, 11, 94–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodman, R. The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 1997, 38, 581–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fleitlich, B.W.; Cortazar, P.G.; Goodman, R. Questionario de capacidades e dificuldades [Strengths and difficulties questionnaire—SDQ]. Infanto Rev. Neuropsiquiatr. Infanc. Adolesc. 2000, 8, 44–50. [Google Scholar]
- Woerner, W.; Fleitlich-Bilyk, B.; Martinussen, R.; Fletcher, J.; Cucchiaro, G.; Dalgalorrondo, P.; Lui, M.; Tannock, R. The strengths and difficulties questionnaire overseas: Evaluations and applications of the SDQ beyond Europe. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2004, 13, 47–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Altafim, E.R.P.; McCoy, D.C.; Linhares, M.B.M. Relations between parenting practices, socioeconomic status, and child behavior in Brazil. Children Youth Serv. Rev. 2018, 89, 93–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helton, J.J.; Moore, A.R.; Henrichsen, C. Food security status of mothers at-risk for child maltreatment. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2018, 93, 263–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jackson, D.B.; Lynch, K.R.; Helton, J.J.; Vaughn, M.G. Food insecurity and violence in the home: Investigating exposure to violence and victimization among preschool-aged children. Health Educ. Behav. 2018, 45, 756–763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reesor-Oyer, L.; Marshall, A.N.; Hernandez, D.C. Examination of co-parenting support and parenting stress as mediators of the food insecurity-maternal depression/anxiety relationship. J. Affect. Disord. 2023, 341, 96–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Arriagada, A.M.; Rawlings, L.B.; Trias, J.; Zumaeta-Aurazo, M. Combining cash transfers and parenting programs: Operational design considerations. Glob. Soc. Policy 2020, 20, 15–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jäggi, L.; Aguilar, L.; Llatance, M.A.; Castellanos, A.; Fink, G.; Hinckley, K.; Bustamante, M.-L.H.; McCoy, D.C.; Verastegui, H.; Mäusezahl, D.; et al. Digital tools to improve parenting behaviour in low-income settings: A mixed-methods feasibility study. Arch. Dis. Child. 2023, 108, 433–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schulz, M.L.; Haslam, D.M.; Morawska, A.; Kish, A. The acceptability of Group Triple P with Brazilian parents. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2021, 30, 1950–1964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branco, M.S.S.; Altafim, E.R.P.; Linhares, M.B.M. Universal intervention to strengthen parenting and prevent child maltreatment: Updated systematic review. Trauma Violence Abuse 2022, 23, 1658–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, H.; Wang, W.; Lachman, J.M. The efficacy of an evidence-based parenting program in preventing child maltreatment in mainland China. Child Abuse Negl. 2024, 147, 106544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Burkhart, K.; Rasiah, S.S.; Knox, M.S.; Vatti, T. Effectiveness of Remote Implementation of the ACT Raising Safe Kids Program: A Pilot Study. Int. J. Child Maltreat. 2024, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Correia, A.; Martins, C.; dos Santos, R.; Hidalgo, V.; de Jesus, S.N.; Nunes, C. Who Benefits Most from the Family Education and Support Program in Cape Verde? A Cluster Analysis. Children 2024, 11, 782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baker, S.; Sanders, M.R.; Turner, K.M.; Morawska, A. A randomized controlled trial evaluating a low-intensity interactive online parenting intervention, Triple P Online Brief, with parents of children with early onset conduct problems. Behav. Res. Ther. 2017, 91, 78–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Leijten, P.; Gardner, F.; Melendez-Torres, G.J.; Van Aar, J.; Hutchings, J.; Schulz, S.; Overbeek, G. Meta-analyses: Key parenting program components for disruptive child behavior. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2019, 58, 180–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Day, J.J.; Sanders, M.R. Do parents benefit from help when completing a self-guided parenting program online? A randomized controlled trial comparing Triple P Online with and without telephone support. Behav. Ther. 2018, 49, 1020–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- de Oliveira, R.C.; Altafim, E.R.P.; Gaspardo, C.M.; Linhares, M.B.M. Strengthening mother-child interactions among mothers and children with behavior problems at early development. Curr. Psychol. 2024, 43, 6062–6074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bo, A.; Durand, B.; Wang, Y. A scoping review of parent-involved ethnic and racial socialization programs. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2023, 144, 106750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldridge, G.; Tomaselli, A.; Nowell, C.; Reupert, A.; Jorm, A.; Yap, M.B.H. Engaging parents in technology-assisted interventions for childhood adversity: Systematic review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2024, 26, e43994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mejia, A.; Calam, R.; Sanders, M.R. A review of parenting programs in developing countries: Opportunities and challenges for preventing emotional and behavioral difficulties in children. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 2012, 15, 163–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Characteristics of the Sample | Total (n = 91) |
---|---|
Child | |
Sex—girls—f (%) | 55 (60.4) |
Age (years)—mean (SD; range) | 4.0 (1.41; 2–6) |
Age groups (years)—f (%) | |
2–4 years | 54 (59.3) |
5–6 years | 37 (40.7) |
Caregiver–f (%) | |
Mother | 89 (97.8) |
Others (father and stepmother) | 2 (2.2) |
Caregiver’s Age (years)—mean (SD; range) | 32.4 (6.26; 20–46) |
Caregiver’s skin color a—f (%) | |
White | 25 (27.5) |
Brown | 46 (50.5) |
Black | 20 (22) |
Caregiver’s schooling—f (%) | |
With no formal education | 1 (1.1) |
Incomplete elementary education | 21 (23.1) |
Elementary school | 12 (13.2) |
High school | 49 (53.8) |
Undergraduate degree | 8 (8.8) |
City—f (%) | |
Campinas | 27 (29.7) |
Louveira | 20 (22.0) |
São Bernardo do Campo | 25 (27.5) |
São Paulo | 19 (20.8) |
Government social benefits | |
Cash transfer—f (%) | 58 (63.7) |
Others (food, gas) | 7 (7.7) |
No | 26 (28.6) |
Food insecurity | |
Yes | 71 (78) |
Access to the internet at home | |
Yes | 90 (98.9) |
Parenting Practices, Sense of Competence, and Child Behavior | Pre-Intervention Mean (SD) | Post-Intervention Mean (SD) | Follow-Up Mean (SD) | p-Value | Contrast between Times |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Parenting Practices (PAFAS) | |||||
Coercive practices | 3.70 (1.62) | 3.20 (1.54) | 3.23 (1.59) | 0.01 | Pre > Post; Pre > Follow up |
Positive Encouragement | 7.33 (1.43) | 7.29 (1.45) | 7.51 (1.33) | 0.31 | NS |
Parenting Sense of Competence (PSOC) | |||||
Satisfaction | 24.27 (3.67) | 24.44 (3.26) | 26.97 (5.37) | <001 | Pre < Follow-up; Post < Follow-up |
Child’s behavior (SDQ) | |||||
Conduct problems | 3.52 | 3.03 | 2.87 | 0.01 | Pre > Follow-up |
Hyperactivity | 4.04 | 3.96 | 3.80 | 0.58 | NS |
Prosocial behavior | 8.65 (1.47) | 8.79 (1.59) | 8.99 (1.30) | 0.08 | NS |
Participant Engagement with the Program | Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Almost Always | Always |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f (%) | |||||
Read the messages | 0 | 10 (11.0) | 4 (4.4) | 14 (15.4) | 63 (69.2) |
Watch the videos | 2 (2.2) | 23 (25.3) | 11 (12.1) | 25 (27.5) | 30 (33) |
Complete the suggested activities with the child (e.g., play and tell a story) | 8 (8.8) | 25 (27.5) | 14 (15.4) | 19 (20.9) | 25 (27.5) |
Reply to messages | 17 (18.7) | 21 (23.1) | 18 (19.8) | 14 (14.3) | 22 (24.2) |
Interact with other participants and comment on messages | 38 (41.8) | 17 (18.7) | 19 (20.9) | 7 (7.7) | 10 (11) |
Participant Satisfaction with Program Content | Not at All Interesting | Slightly Interesting | Somewhat Interesting | Interesting | Very Interesting |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
f (%) | |||||
Violence against children | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.1) | 13 (14.3) | 75 (82.4) |
Healthy eating | 1 (1.1) | 0 | 1 (1.1) | 17 (18.7) | 72 (79.1) |
Ethnic-racial relations and racism | 2 (2.2) | 0 | 1 (1.1) | 21 (23.1) | 67 (73.6) |
General Health | 1 (1.1) | 0 | 3 (3.3) | 22 (24.2) | 65 (71.4) |
Child development | 0 | 2 (2.2) | 3 (3.3) | 21 (23.1) | 65 (71.4) |
Accidents at home | 3 (3.3) | 2 (2.2) | 7 (7.7) | 17 (18.7) | 62 (68.1) |
Child behavior and emotions | 1 (1.1) | 0 | 1 (1.1) | 29 (31.9) | 60 (65.9) |
Plays | 0 | 1 (1.1) | 4 (4.4) | 26 (28.6) | 60 (65.9) |
Music and storytelling | 1 (1.1) | 0 | 6 (6.6) | 29 (31.9) | 55 (60.4) |
Financial education | 1 (1.1) | 6 (6.6) | 5 (5.5) | 49 (53.8) | 30 (33.0) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Altafim, E.R.P.; de Oliveira, R.C.; Pluciennik, G.A.; Marino, E.; Gaspardo, C.M. Digital Parenting Program: Enhancing Parenting and Reducing Child Behavior Problems. Children 2024, 11, 980. https://doi.org/10.3390/children11080980
Altafim ERP, de Oliveira RC, Pluciennik GA, Marino E, Gaspardo CM. Digital Parenting Program: Enhancing Parenting and Reducing Child Behavior Problems. Children. 2024; 11(8):980. https://doi.org/10.3390/children11080980
Chicago/Turabian StyleAltafim, Elisa Rachel Pisani, Rebeca Cristina de Oliveira, Gabriela Aratangy Pluciennik, Eduardo Marino, and Cláudia Maria Gaspardo. 2024. "Digital Parenting Program: Enhancing Parenting and Reducing Child Behavior Problems" Children 11, no. 8: 980. https://doi.org/10.3390/children11080980