Addiction PsychologicalPVC_PIU_TAUNCT05117216
Examining the Efficacy of "Parental Vigilant Care" for Reducing Problematic Internet Usage
A study testing Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training) and Technological Parental Monitoring in people with Addiction Psychological, run by Tel Aviv University.
Trial summary
Problematic Internet Use (PIU) and Unsafe Internet Use (UIU) are the two main potential negative consequences of children's online activities. Parents have a vital role in reducing these consequences and shaping a safe digital environment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Addiction Psychological
- What is being tested?
- Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training) and Technological Parental Monitoring
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 297 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2016to 1 Nov 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Functioning deterioration of the child (age 12-16) due to online activity in the past 6 months in at least one of the following domains: school, social relationships, participation in family activities, sleeping patterns, and mood (according to parents' self-report).
- The child owns a mobile phone.
Who cannot join
- A psychiatric diagnosis of the child
- A significant personal crisis in the previous 12 months (e.g., divorce, loss of a significant person)
- A parental control application is installed on their children's mobile phones.
About this study
Official title: Examining the Efficacy of "Technological Parental Monitoring" Approach Versus "Parental Vigilant Care" Approach for Reducing Problematic Internet Usage Among Adolescents
Problematic Internet Use (PIU) and Unsafe Internet Use (UIU) are the two main potential negative consequences of children's online activities. Parents have a vital role in reducing these consequences and shaping a safe digital environment. Parental Vigilant Care (PVC) is a systematic approach that integrates active and restrictive mediation practices, in which parents regulate their involvement according to the alarm signs the parents detect.
This study is a randomized controlled trial designed to assess the efficacy of the PVC parent training. Families were randomly assigned to either (1) PVC group (2) Technological Parental Monitoring group (3) combining both group parental training and installation of filtering devices (PVC + TPM) or (4) Control group.
Read the detailed description
BACKGROUND: One of the most disturbing phenomena regarding the digital age is Problematic Internet Use (PIU) among adolescents (12-16). PIU is defined as a functioning impairment due to: (1) internet excessive use that may lead to the neglect of developmental tasks, or (2) unsafe use which includes viewing inappropriate content, abusive encounters, or commercial exploitation. Clinical and research experience shows that parental involvement plays a critical role in reducing risk behaviors among adolescents in various domains. Despite the ample literature regarding parental involvement, few studies have evaluated the efficacy of parental involvement on adolescents' PIU in reducing functional impairment and designing a safe digital environment. One of the most investigated theoretical approaches in this field is Parental Monitoring (PM). PM is defined as a set of parental practices that aim to monitor and supervise adolescent activities. Despite evidence that PM is effective in reducing risk behaviors among adolescents, PM also has some drawbacks. Studies have demonstrated that it may be perceived as rigid parental control, thereby damaging internalization of parental presence, and potentially sabotaging adolescents' growing independence and autonomy. In the digital world, rigid PM can be defined as using filtering and surveillance applications that enable parents to closely monitor and enforce strict rules regarding their child's internet use. This approach is defined as in the current study as "Technological Parental Monitoring" (TPM). On the other hand, "Parental Vigilant Care" (PVC), is theoretically conceptualized as an alternative parental involvement approach that addresses the weaknesses of PM. By implementing PVC principles, parents develop a positive and non-judgmental dialogue with their children regarding domains the participants are concerned about. Additionally, parents determine their level of active involvement in a flexible manner, specific to the risks presented by their children. By executing decisive and consistent parental involvement, parents strengthen their presence in their children's digital world, therefore, reducing PIU by internalization of safe digital behavior.
OBJECTIVES: The current study aims to examine the efficacy of using digital parental control, according to TPM approach, in comparison with flexible integration of positive parental presence with setting boundaries, according to PVC approach. These approaches will be compared in light of the following outcomes: (1) increasing effective parental involvement in PIU of their adolescent children, (2) reducing PIU and improving adolescent's functioning, and (3) internalizing parental values regarding safe digital activities by children, in order to maintain a parental presence over time.
METHOD: To examine these objectives, a randomized controlled trial was conducted.
Sample size calculation: To assess sample size, the investigators used G-Power software, assuming type 1 error of 5%, power 80%, and analysis of variance, repeated measures with three measurement points, a moderate effect size of time X group interaction (µ2 = .15). The minimum sample size required to meet these assumptions was 134 participants. The final sample consisted of 157 adolescents, in addition to their parents (one parent for each adolescent), yielding a total sample size of 314 participants.
Two-hundred and 297 parents and their children (12-16 y/o) were randomly assigned to four groups: (1) Group parental training according to PVC approach; (2) installation of filtering devices on adolescents' mobile phones and setting them for reducing time use and prohibiting inappropriate content (TPM); (3) combining both group parental training and installation of filtering devices (PVC + TPM) and (4) control group that did not receive any intervention.
Three types of measures were used: (A) Self-reported questionnaires completed by parents: Parental Helplessness for Internet Supervision, Internet Parental Styles, Norms for Unsafe Internet Behaviour, Parental Knowledge of the child's online activities, Family Environment and Adolescent's Functioning (B) Self-reported questionnaires completed by adolescent: Problematic Internet Use and unsafe internet behavior (C) Cellular internet usage retrieved directly from adolescents' mobile devices including total time online, as well as time by specific contents (video games, pornography, gambling, YouTube and social networking sites). The self-report questionnaires were gathered at three time points - before intervention (T1), immediately after termination of intervention (T2) and after 8 weeks follow-up (T3). The online activities data were gathered continuously for 12 weeks (a baseline week, 3 weeks of intervention and 8 weeks of follow-up).
Data Analysis:
Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25. First, descriptive statistics were produced using means and standard deviations for all variables. Group comparisons on demographic variables were conducted using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t- tests for continuous variables. Intervention effects were examined using intent-to-treat analyses. The groups were compared with self-reported measures using repeated measures Analysis of Covariance, examining interaction effect between time (within-subject) and group (between-subject). In these analyses, the expectation to benefit from treatment was controlled. Post-hoc corrections were used for to further examine the significant two-way interactions, and depicted the effect sizes using Cohen's d's both between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1), and also between post-intervention (T1) and follow-up (T2). Time of online activity was analyzed using Multi-Level Modeling (MLM) since average daily time online per-week (12 weeks) was nested in the child's group (PVC vs. Control). In addition, to examine the persistence of improvement achieved during intervention, change in average time online between intervention period (3 weeks) and the follow-up period (8 weeks) was tested.
- Conditions
- Addiction Psychological
- Being tested
- Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training), Technological Parental Monitoring
- Keywords
- Problematic Internet Use, Parental Vigilant Care, Parental Training
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training)Behavioural
Technological Parental MonitoringBehavioural
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Parental Vigilant Care | Experimental | 3 sessions of group parental training Receives: Behavioral: Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training) |
| Technological Parental Monitoring | Active comparator | The installation of filtering devices on adolescents' mobile phones and setting them for reducing time use and prohibiting inappropriate content Receives: Behavioral: Technological Parental Monitoring |
| PVC + TPM | Active comparator | combining both group parental training and installation of filtering devices Receives: Behavioral: Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training); Behavioral: Technological Parental Monitoring |
| Control | No intervention | Control group that did not receive any intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Internet use (hours/day) by Adolescence
Time online using mobile
Measured: Reducing time online, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Secondary outcomes (3)
Parental Helplessness for Internet Supervision
Self-reported scale: 1-Lowest Parental Helplessness, to 7-Most severe Parental Helplessness
Measured: Improving parental helplessness, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Adolescent's Functioning Impairment
Self-reported scale: 1-Mild Functioning Impairment , to 7-Most severe Functioning Impairment
Measured: Improving adolescent's functioning, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Family Environment
Self-reported scale: 1- Poor Family Environment , to 7-Extremely Positive Family Environment
Measured: Improving family environment, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Nov 2021
- Study start1 Jan 2016
- Primary completion1 Nov 2018
- Study completion1 Nov 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Addiction PsychologicalStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 297 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Tel Aviv University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Yaron Sela, Tel Aviv University
- Investigators
- Meir Lahav, Prof., Study chair, Tel Aviv University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05117216
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PVC_PIU_TAU
- Acronym
- PVC_PIU_TAU
- Status last verified
- Nov 2021
- First submitted
- 19 Oct 2021
- Last updated
- 12 Nov 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Nov 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Examining the Efficacy of "Technological Parental Monitoring" Approach Versus "Parental Vigilant Care" Approach for Reducing Problematic Internet Usage Among Adolescents
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05117216
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PVC_PIU_TAU / PVC_PIU_TAU
- Conditions
- Addiction Psychological
- Keywords
- Problematic Internet Use, Parental Vigilant Care, Parental Training
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 297 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Tel Aviv UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Nov 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Nov 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Nov 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Problematic Internet Use (PIU) and Unsafe Internet Use (UIU) are the two main potential negative consequences of children's online activities. Parents have a vital role in reducing these consequences and shaping a safe digital environment. Parental Vigilant Care (PVC) is a systematic approach that integrates active and restrictive mediation practices, in which parents regulate their involvement according to the alarm signs the parents detect.
This study is a randomized controlled trial designed to assess the efficacy of the PVC parent training. Families were randomly assigned to either (1) PVC group (2) Technological Parental Monitoring group (3) combining both group parental training and installation of filtering devices (PVC + TPM) or (4) Control group.
Detailed description
BACKGROUND: One of the most disturbing phenomena regarding the digital age is Problematic Internet Use (PIU) among adolescents (12-16). PIU is defined as a functioning impairment due to: (1) internet excessive use that may lead to the neglect of developmental tasks, or (2) unsafe use which includes viewing inappropriate content, abusive encounters, or commercial exploitation. Clinical and research experience shows that parental involvement plays a critical role in reducing risk behaviors among adolescents in various domains. Despite the ample literature regarding parental involvement, few studies have evaluated the efficacy of parental involvement on adolescents' PIU in reducing functional impairment and designing a safe digital environment. One of the most investigated theoretical approaches in this field is Parental Monitoring (PM). PM is defined as a set of parental practices that aim to monitor and supervise adolescent activities. Despite evidence that PM is effective in reducing risk behaviors among adolescents, PM also has some drawbacks. Studies have demonstrated that it may be perceived as rigid parental control, thereby damaging internalization of parental presence, and potentially sabotaging adolescents' growing independence and autonomy. In the digital world, rigid PM can be defined as using filtering and surveillance applications that enable parents to closely monitor and enforce strict rules regarding their child's internet use. This approach is defined as in the current study as "Technological Parental Monitoring" (TPM). On the other hand, "Parental Vigilant Care" (PVC), is theoretically conceptualized as an alternative parental involvement approach that addresses the weaknesses of PM. By implementing PVC principles, parents develop a positive and non-judgmental dialogue with their children regarding domains the participants are concerned about. Additionally, parents determine their level of active involvement in a flexible manner, specific to the risks presented by their children. By executing decisive and consistent parental involvement, parents strengthen their presence in their children's digital world, therefore, reducing PIU by internalization of safe digital behavior.
OBJECTIVES: The current study aims to examine the efficacy of using digital parental control, according to TPM approach, in comparison with flexible integration of positive parental presence with setting boundaries, according to PVC approach. These approaches will be compared in light of the following outcomes: (1) increasing effective parental involvement in PIU of their adolescent children, (2) reducing PIU and improving adolescent's functioning, and (3) internalizing parental values regarding safe digital activities by children, in order to maintain a parental presence over time.
METHOD: To examine these objectives, a randomized controlled trial was conducted.
Sample size calculation: To assess sample size, the investigators used G-Power software, assuming type 1 error of 5%, power 80%, and analysis of variance, repeated measures with three measurement points, a moderate effect size of time X group interaction (µ2 = .15). The minimum sample size required to meet these assumptions was 134 participants. The final sample consisted of 157 adolescents, in addition to their parents (one parent for each adolescent), yielding a total sample size of 314 participants.
Two-hundred and 297 parents and their children (12-16 y/o) were randomly assigned to four groups: (1) Group parental training according to PVC approach; (2) installation of filtering devices on adolescents' mobile phones and setting them for reducing time use and prohibiting inappropriate content (TPM); (3) combining both group parental training and installation of filtering devices (PVC + TPM) and (4) control group that did not receive any intervention.
Three types of measures were used: (A) Self-reported questionnaires completed by parents: Parental Helplessness for Internet Supervision, Internet Parental Styles, Norms for Unsafe Internet Behaviour, Parental Knowledge of the child's online activities, Family Environment and Adolescent's Functioning (B) Self-reported questionnaires completed by adolescent: Problematic Internet Use and unsafe internet behavior (C) Cellular internet usage retrieved directly from adolescents' mobile devices including total time online, as well as time by specific contents (video games, pornography, gambling, YouTube and social networking sites). The self-report questionnaires were gathered at three time points - before intervention (T1), immediately after termination of intervention (T2) and after 8 weeks follow-up (T3). The online activities data were gathered continuously for 12 weeks (a baseline week, 3 weeks of intervention and 8 weeks of follow-up).
Data Analysis:
Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25. First, descriptive statistics were produced using means and standard deviations for all variables. Group comparisons on demographic variables were conducted using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t- tests for continuous variables. Intervention effects were examined using intent-to-treat analyses. The groups were compared with self-reported measures using repeated measures Analysis of Covariance, examining interaction effect between time (within-subject) and group (between-subject). In these analyses, the expectation to benefit from treatment was controlled. Post-hoc corrections were used for to further examine the significant two-way interactions, and depicted the effect sizes using Cohen's d's both between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1), and also between post-intervention (T1) and follow-up (T2). Time of online activity was analyzed using Multi-Level Modeling (MLM) since average daily time online per-week (12 weeks) was nested in the child's group (PVC vs. Control). In addition, to examine the persistence of improvement achieved during intervention, change in average time online between intervention period (3 weeks) and the follow-up period (8 weeks) was tested.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 4
- Model description
- Randomized Controlled Trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Parental Vigilant Care | Experimental | Behavioral: Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training)3 sessions of group parental training |
| Technological Parental Monitoring | Active comparator | Behavioral: Technological Parental MonitoringThe installation of filtering devices on adolescents' mobile phones and setting them for reducing time use and prohibiting inappropriate content |
| PVC + TPM | Active comparator | Behavioral: Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training), Behavioral: Technological Parental Monitoringcombining both group parental training and installation of filtering devices |
| Control | No intervention | –Control group that did not receive any intervention |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Functioning deterioration of the child (age 12-16) due to online activity in the past 6 months in at least one of the following domains: school, social relationships, participation in family activities, sleeping patterns, and mood (according to parents' self-report).
- The child owns a mobile phone.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- A psychiatric diagnosis of the child
- A significant personal crisis in the previous 12 months (e.g., divorce, loss of a significant person)
- A parental control application is installed on their children's mobile phones.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training) | Behavioural | PVC + TPM, Parental Vigilant Care |
| Technological Parental Monitoring | Behavioural | PVC + TPM, Technological Parental Monitoring |
Primary outcome
Internet use (hours/day) by Adolescence
Time frame: Reducing time online, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Time online using mobile
3 secondary outcomes
Parental Helplessness for Internet Supervision
Time frame: Improving parental helplessness, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Adolescent's Functioning Impairment
Time frame: Improving adolescent's functioning, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Family Environment
Time frame: Improving family environment, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 Nov 2021.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Addiction Psychological
Recruiting
The Trans-Led Care Study
Substance Abuse, Substance Addiction
Not yet recruiting
The Impact of Equine-Assisted Therapy on Mental Health and Addictive Behaviors in Patients Receiving Addiction Treatment
Equine-assisted Therapy, Addiction
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Ecological Momentary Assessment of State-Dependent Decision-Making and Metacognition Across a Psychopathology Continuum
Depression, Anxiety
Not yet recruiting
QAIAx - SGI/SI Smart Health Cities: Microcity Enclave Program (Quantum SI/AGI Agency a/k/a AI City Hall Project - UPSTO App Nos. 64/074,526, 64/063,557, 64/105,164, 63/903,181, 63/729,428, 64/125,360; USPTO EO 9424 Assignment ID: 2101042 / ARN: REEL/FRAME: 76481/0026 - OUSD-R&E, Department of War)
Asperger's Disorder, Asperger Disorder
Recruiting
Fighting Addictions, Improving Lives: COmprehensive Drug Rehabilitation With Music
Substance Use Disorder (SUD)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Meir Lahav, Prof. study chair
Tel Aviv University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Parental Vigilant Care (Parental training) and Technological Parental Monitoring in people with Addiction Psychological, run by Tel Aviv University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 Nov 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Internet use (hours/day) by Adolescence (time frame: Reducing time online, through study completion, an average of 12 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 12 Nov 2021.