Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This study showed that Parents under Pressure was successfully delivered within two non-NHS settings, was acceptable and suitable for the study population, and a larger evaluation is feasible.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Anne Whittaker 1,*, Lawrie Elliott 2, Julie Taylor 3, Sharon Dawe 4, Paul Harnett 5, Andrew Stoddart 6, Peter Littlewood 7, Roy Robertson 6, Barbara Farquharson 1, Heather Strachan 1

1 Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK
2 Department of Nursing and Community Health, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
3 School of Nursing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK
4 School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
5 School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University, QLD, Australia
6 Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
7 Substance Use Psychology Service, Astley Ainslie Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
* Corresponding author Email: Anne.Whittaker@stir.ac.uk

Declared competing interests of authors: Sharon Dawe is co-developer of the Parents under Pressure (PuP) programme. The PuP programme is owned and disseminated by Griffith University (Brisbane, QLD, Australia) and the university receives payment for training and implementation support. Proceeds from dissemination are distributed in accordance with Griffith University policy. Surplus funds from training contracts are used to support research activities associated with the PuP programme. No payments for training or implementation support were received from participating agencies during the course of this study. Paul Harnett is the co-developer of the PuP programme.

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document