Being Referred for Child Protection ServicesNCT07448870
Evaluating the Mentalization-based Treatment Lighthouse Parenting Programme: Protocol of a Feasibility and Acceptability Quasi-Experimental Study
A study testing Lighthouse Parenting Programme and Treatment-as-usual (TAU) in people with Being Referred for Child Protection Services, run by Universidade do Porto at 1 site in Portugal.
Trial summary
The goal of this study is to learn whether it is practical and acceptable to deliver the Lighthouse Parenting Programme and to carry out the planned research procedures with caregivers involved with Child Protection Services. The study will also gather early information to help plan a future, larger evaluation study. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Being Referred for Child Protection Services
- What is being tested?
- Lighthouse Parenting Programme and Treatment-as-usual (TAU)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePortugal
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2026to 1 Jan 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- - Adults (18 years old or older)
- - Caregiver of a child from 0 to 18 years of age
- - - Being referred for Child Protection Services
- - - Under a measure of Child Promotion and Protection at the family home
- - - Withholding parenting responsibilities over the target child/young person
- - - Never having attended the Lighthouse Parenting Programme
Who cannot join
- - -Foster parents
- - - -Perpetration of child sexual abuse
- - - -Severe learning disabilities
- - - -Being clinically counter-indicated for a group programme (e.g, Antissocial Personality Disorder)
- - - -The target child/young person is in out-of-home care
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Portugal1 site
Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences of the University of Porto
Porto, Porto District, 4200-135
About this study
The goal of this study is to learn whether it is practical and acceptable to deliver the Lighthouse Parenting Programme and to carry out the planned research procedures with caregivers involved with Child Protection Services. The study will also gather early information to help plan a future, larger evaluation study.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Read more
- Is it possible to recruit caregivers involved with Child Protection Services into this type of study?
- Can the Lighthouse Parenting Programme be delivered as intended by trained facilitators?
- Are the questionnaires and assessment procedures suitable for caregivers and sensitive to change over time?
- Is the Lighthouse Parenting Programme acceptable to caregivers and facilitators?
- Is participation in the study acceptable to caregivers?
Researchers will compare caregivers who take part in the Lighthouse Parenting Programme with caregivers who receive usual services to see whether there are early signs of change in parenting- and child-related outcomes that can inform future research.
Participants will take part in the Lighthouse Parenting Programme, consisting of 20 weekly group sessions focused on enhancing caregivers' capacity to understand their own and their child's mental states (mentalization), or will receive the usual services and supports provided by Child Protection Services. Participants will also complete questionnaires and interviews about their own experiences, parenting, and their child's wellbeing at different points during the study.
- Being tested
- Lighthouse Parenting Programme, Treatment-as-usual (TAU)
- Keywords
- child protection, child maltreatment, parenting programme, MBT, feasibility, acceptability
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Lighthouse Parenting ProgrammeOther
The Lighthouse Parenting Programme is a 20-session Mentalization-based Treatment (MBT) for groups of parents, that aims to reduce child maltreatment potential by increasing caregivers' mentalizing capacity. Through the use of parental mentalization-related metaphors, therapists support parents in exploring their child's attachment experiences and their own, making sense of misunderstandings in the relationship with their child, inhibiting harmful responses and repairing ruptures (Byrne et al., 2018). Sessions include psychoeducation and reflective discussions. Each Lighthouse group is composed of 8 to 12 parents. Sessions are delivered weekly by two facilitators (including at least one qualified psychologist), lasting approximately 2 hours each. Facilitators will undergo a 6-day training course, including theoretical-experiential didactic activities, led by the author of the programme. Facilitators receive weekly group clinical supervision (1.30 - 2 hours) by an MBT specialist.
Treatment-as-usual (TAU)Other
Treatment-as-Usual (TAU) refers to standard support delivered at the institutions in line with routine practice, such as individual psychological support and home-visiting. TAU can be variable and tailored to each participant, therefore, intervention characteristics will be monitored and registered throughout the trial.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Lighthouse Parenting Programme | Experimental | The experimental group will receive the Lighthouse Parenting Programme. Receives: Other: Lighthouse Parenting Programme |
| Treatment-as-usal (TAU) | Active comparator | The control group will receive Treatment-as-Usual (TAU). Receives: Other: Treatment-as-usual (TAU) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Feasibility of the recruitment strategy
Feasibility of the recruitment strategy will be assessed based on the participant enrollment rate, that is the ratio of acceptance to enter the study by the number of service users invited. This will be tracked through recording the number of service users approached for recruitment and responses to invitations (whether accepting or not), including reasons for rejecting assessed through qualitative feedback from participants. Data will be systematically registered in Excel spreadsheets.
Measured: From recruitment (throughout the 2 months prior to baseline) to baseline assessments
Feasibility of data collection procedures: sensitivity to change of clinical outcome measures
Sensitivity to change of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on the analysis of within-group change over time, particularly the direction and magnitude (e.g., effect sizes, mean differences) of observed changes in relation to intervention targets. This assesses whether measures can detect expected change.
Measured: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of data collection procedures: distributional properties of clinical outcome measures
Distributional properties of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on descriptive statistics of scores, including score distributions, variability (e.g., SD, range), floor effects and ceiling effects. Results will reflect how appropriately each measure behaves in the sample.
Measured: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of data collection procedures: realiability of clinical outcome measures
Reliability of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on the internal consistency coefficients (e.g., Cronbach's alpha) of scales within the study sample.
Measured: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of data collection procedures: construct coherence of clinical outcome measures
Construct coherence of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on correlations between theoretically related constructs. This evaluates whether measures behave as expected theoretically.
Measured: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of data collection procedures: completion rates of clinical outcome measures
Completion rates of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated by calculating the percentage of participants that completed the psychological assessments at each time point. This reflects procedural feasibility of data collection.
Measured: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of data collection procedures: missing data on clinical outcome measures
Missing data on clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on missing data rates (percentage of missing data) and patterns (e.g., systematic vs random). This allows to explore the adequacy of clinical outcome measures and, if missing data is substancial and not at random, the factors that may be affecting measure suitability.
Measured: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of the intervention delivery (based on fidelity to treatment)
Fidelity to treatment (experimental condition only) will be assessed by a supervisor-informed rating system, specifically developed for this study and adapted from the existing tool used at the ERiC trial (Nick Midgley, Holly Dwyer Hall and Emma Morris, Anna Freud, unpublished 2024), evaluating the quality of the therapists' mentalizing stance on four different dimensions pertaining to key MBT principles, each rated on a 4-point Likert scale, assessed across supervision sessions. Scores ≥3 per dimension are considered satisfactory. Fidelity to treatment will also be evaluated based on the percentage of key treatment activities (experiential and psychoeducational) that facilitators were able to deliver - these will be tracked by facilitators' self-report of activities conducted in each session.
Measured: From start to completion of treatment delivery (baseline to 5 months after the treatment starts)
Feasibility of the intervention delivery (based on participant attendance and retention)
Attendance rates will be calculated based on the mean number of sessions attended by participants; retention rates will be calculated by the percentage of participants that have not dropped-out across different timepoints of the study; reasons for discontinuation will be assessed by qualitative feedback from participants; this data will be registered in Excel spreadsheets.
Measured: Attendance: From start to completion of treatment delivery (baseline to 5 months after the treatment starts) Retention: From recruitment (throughout the 2 months prior to baseline) to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme: perpectives from participants in the experimental condition
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme from participants' perspective will be assessed through semi-structured interviews with participants in the experimental condition focused on their experiences of the programme, their views on the intervention's appropriateness (cultural, clinical, contextual), and potential barriers or facilitators to attending and engaging with the programme
Measured: At post-test assessments (5 months after the treatment starts)
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme: perpectives from facilitators
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme from the facilitators' perspectives will be assessed through focus groups with facilitator dyads, focusing on their perceptions of the appropriateness of the intervention, barriers and facilitators to participant attendance and to the delivery of the programme
Measured: At post-test assessments (5 months after the treatment starts)
Acceptability of study procedures: perspectives from participants
Acceptability of study procedures will be assessed through:
- Semi-structured interviews, exploring: participants' perspectives on the adequacy of study's procedures, including recruitment strategy and data collection measures (e.g., burden, clarity and relevance).
Interviews will be conducted at post-test, given the risk of missing data at follow-up assessments. Participants who attend follow-up assessments will also respond to an additional interview question regarding the acceptability of the follow-up assessment procedures. Both retained participants and those who drop out will be invited to be interviewed. For participants who formally withdraw from the study, the timing of the interview will remain flexible, with priority given to conducting it as soon as possible after withdrawal.
Measured: At post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up assessments (8 months after treatment starts)
Acceptability of study procedures: perspectives from facilitators
Acceptability of study procedures will be assessed through focus groups with facilitator dyads, focusing on adequacy e replicability of study's procedures
Measured: At post-test assessments (5 months after the treatment starts)
Secondary outcomes (7)
Sociodemographic data
Sociodemographic data will be collected, including: age and sex of participant, marital status, level of education, employment status, family income, number of children, age and sex of children, measure of Child Protection applied and duration.
Measured: At baseline
Parental history of adverse childhood experiences
Parental history of adverse childhood experiences will be evaluated through the Adverse Childhood Experiences questionnaire (ACE; Felitti et al.1998; Portuguese version by Silva \& Maia, 2008). The ACE assesses exposure to potentially traumatic experiences in childhood, such as abuse, neglect, and household adversity (29 items). Includes the following subscales: 1) Emotional abuse, 2) Physical abuse, 3) Sexual abuse, 4) Emotional neglect, 5) Physical neglect, 6) Divorce or parental separation, 7) Exposition to domestic violence, 8) Substance abuse in the family, 9) Mental health or suicide, 10) Incarceration of family member.
Measured: At baseline
Parental Reflective Functioning
Parental Reflective Functioning will be evaluated through the current gold standard measure Parent Development Interview - Reflective Functioning (PDI-RF; Slade et al., 2004). The PDI is an interview-based measure of parental reflective functioning, assessing the parent's capacity to understand their own and their child's mental states. The data analyst is certified by the PDI Institute (https://www.pditraininginstitute.com/) to code the PDI.
Measured: At baseline and post-test (5 months after the treatment starts) assessments
Child's psychological adjustment (parent-report)
Child's psychological adjustment will be assessed with the parent-report version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman et al., 1997, 1999; Portuguese version available at http://www.sdqinfo.com), a brief 25-item screening measure of children's emotional and behavioural symptoms as per reported by parents. The SDQ includes the following subscales: 1) Total Difficulties, 2) Emotional Symptoms, 3) Conduct Problems, 4) Inattention/ Hyperactivity, 5) Peer-Problems, and 6) Prosocial behaviour.
Measured: At baseline, post-test (5 months after the treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Parenting stress
Parenting stress will be evaluated with the Parenting Stress Scale (PSS; Berry \& Jones, 1995; Portuguese version by Algarvio et al., 2018), a 14-item measure to assess perceived stress associated with parenting, balancing parenting demands with rewards and satisfaction. The PSS includes the following subscales: 1) Parental stressors, 2) Parental satisfaction, 3) Lack of control, and 4) Fears and anxieties.
Measured: At baseline, post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Parent cognitions
Parent cognitions will be assessed with the Parent Cognition Scale (PCS; Snarr et al., 2009; Portuguese version by Fernandes et al., 2019), a 30-item measure to assess parents' beliefs, interpretations, and attributions about their child's misbehaviour. The PCS includes two subscales: 1) Child-responsible attributions, and 2) Parent-causal attributions.
As a theoretical mediator of change, this outcome will be assessed at two additional timepoints mid-treatment.
Measured: At baseline, during treatment (week 7 and week 14 into treatment), post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Parental emotion regulation difficulties
Parental emotion regulation difficulties will be assessed with the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale - Short Form (DERS-SF; Kaufman et al., 2016; Portuguese version by Gouveia et al., 2018). The DERS-SF is a 18-item screening tool that measures difficulties in understanding, accepting, and managing emotions, including impulse control and emotion regulation strategies. It includes the following subscales: 1) Strategies, 2) Goals, 3) Impulse, 4) Clarity, 5) Awareness, 6) Non-Acceptance, and 7) Difficulties in emotion regulation [Total Score].
As a theoretical mediator of change, this outcome will be assessed at two additional timepoints mid-treatment.
Measured: At baseline, during treatment (week 7 and week 14 into treatment), post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Mar 2026
- Study start1 Mar 2026
- Primary completion15 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Jan 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Being Referred for Child Protection ServicesStudies 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
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- A quasi-experimental study that will adopt a pretest-posttest nonequivalent groups design methodology.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universidade do Porto
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Filipa Martins, Universidade do Porto
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07448870
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- FAROL001
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 11 Feb 2026
- Last updated
- 8 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be shared. The study involves a sample recruited from small communities under highly sensitive conditions, namely referrals by Child Protection Services. Given the limited sample size and contextual specificity, there is a risk of participant re-identification even after anonymisation, particularly through the qualitative data (e.g., PDI-RF narratives). As the primary focus of the study is to assess acceptability and feasibility of intervention and research procedures, rather than examining treatment effectiveness, data sharing is not essential to achieving the study's objectives.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluating the Mentalization-based Treatment Lighthouse Parenting Programme: Protocol of a Feasibility and Acceptability Quasi-Experimental Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07448870
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FAROL001
- Keywords
- child protection, child maltreatment, parenting programme, MBT, feasibility, acceptability
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Universidade do PortoUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 4 Mar 2026 (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.
The goal of this study is to learn whether it is practical and acceptable to deliver the Lighthouse Parenting Programme and to carry out the planned research procedures with caregivers involved with Child Protection Services. The study will also gather early information to help plan a future, larger evaluation study.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Is it possible to recruit caregivers involved with Child Protection Services into this type of study?
- Can the Lighthouse Parenting Programme be delivered as intended by trained facilitators?
- Are the questionnaires and assessment procedures suitable for caregivers and sensitive to change over time?
- Is the Lighthouse Parenting Programme acceptable to caregivers and facilitators?
- Is participation in the study acceptable to caregivers?
Researchers will compare caregivers who take part in the Lighthouse Parenting Programme with caregivers who receive usual services to see whether there are early signs of change in parenting- and child-related outcomes that can inform future research.
Participants will take part in the Lighthouse Parenting Programme, consisting of 20 weekly group sessions focused on enhancing caregivers' capacity to understand their own and their child's mental states (mentalization), or will receive the usual services and supports provided by Child Protection Services. Participants will also complete questionnaires and interviews about their own experiences, parenting, and their child's wellbeing at different points during the study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- A quasi-experimental study that will adopt a pretest-posttest nonequivalent groups design methodology.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Lighthouse Parenting Programme | Experimental | Other: Lighthouse Parenting ProgrammeThe experimental group will receive the Lighthouse Parenting Programme. |
| Treatment-as-usal (TAU) | Active comparator | Other: Treatment-as-usual (TAU)The control group will receive Treatment-as-Usual (TAU). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- - Adults (18 years old or older)
- - Caregiver of a child from 0 to 18 years of age
- - - Being referred for Child Protection Services
- - - Under a measure of Child Promotion and Protection at the family home
- - - Withholding parenting responsibilities over the target child/young person
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- - -Foster parents
- - - -Perpetration of child sexual abuse
- - - -Severe learning disabilities
- - - -Being clinically counter-indicated for a group programme (e.g, Antissocial Personality Disorder)
- - - -The target child/young person is in out-of-home care
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Lighthouse Parenting ProgrammeThe Lighthouse Parenting Programme is a 20-session Mentalization-based Treatment (MBT) for groups of parents, that aims to reduce child maltreatment potential by increasing caregivers' mentalizing capacity. Through the use of parental mentalization-related metaphors, therapists support parents in exploring their child's attachment experiences and their own, making sense of misunderstandings in the relationship with their child, inhibiting harmful responses and repairing ruptures (Byrne et al., 2018). Sessions include psychoeducation and reflective discussions. Each Lighthouse group is composed of 8 to 12 parents. Sessions are delivered weekly by two facilitators (including at least one qualified psychologist), lasting approximately 2 hours each. Facilitators will undergo a 6-day training course, including theoretical-experiential didactic activities, led by the author of the programme. Facilitators receive weekly group clinical supervision (1.30 - 2 hours) by an MBT specialist. | Other | Lighthouse Parenting Programme |
| Treatment-as-usual (TAU)Treatment-as-Usual (TAU) refers to standard support delivered at the institutions in line with routine practice, such as individual psychological support and home-visiting. TAU can be variable and tailored to each participant, therefore, intervention characteristics will be monitored and registered throughout the trial. | Other | Treatment-as-usal (TAU) |
Primary outcome
Feasibility of the recruitment strategy
Time frame: From recruitment (throughout the 2 months prior to baseline) to baseline assessments
Feasibility of the recruitment strategy will be assessed based on the participant enrollment rate, that is the ratio of acceptance to enter the study by the number of service users invited. This will be tracked through recording the number of service users approached for recruitment and responses to invitations (whether accepting or not), including reasons for rejecting assessed through qualitative feedback from participants. Data will be systematically registered in Excel spreadsheets.
Feasibility of data collection procedures: sensitivity to change of clinical outcome measures
Time frame: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Sensitivity to change of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on the analysis of within-group change over time, particularly the direction and magnitude (e.g., effect sizes, mean differences) of observed changes in relation to intervention targets. This assesses whether measures can detect expected change.
Feasibility of data collection procedures: distributional properties of clinical outcome measures
Time frame: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Distributional properties of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on descriptive statistics of scores, including score distributions, variability (e.g., SD, range), floor effects and ceiling effects. Results will reflect how appropriately each measure behaves in the sample.
Feasibility of data collection procedures: realiability of clinical outcome measures
Time frame: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Reliability of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on the internal consistency coefficients (e.g., Cronbach's alpha) of scales within the study sample.
Feasibility of data collection procedures: construct coherence of clinical outcome measures
Time frame: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Construct coherence of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on correlations between theoretically related constructs. This evaluates whether measures behave as expected theoretically.
Feasibility of data collection procedures: completion rates of clinical outcome measures
Time frame: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Completion rates of clinical outcome measures will be evaluated by calculating the percentage of participants that completed the psychological assessments at each time point. This reflects procedural feasibility of data collection.
Feasibility of data collection procedures: missing data on clinical outcome measures
Time frame: From baseline to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Missing data on clinical outcome measures will be evaluated based on missing data rates (percentage of missing data) and patterns (e.g., systematic vs random). This allows to explore the adequacy of clinical outcome measures and, if missing data is substancial and not at random, the factors that may be affecting measure suitability.
Feasibility of the intervention delivery (based on fidelity to treatment)
Time frame: From start to completion of treatment delivery (baseline to 5 months after the treatment starts)
Fidelity to treatment (experimental condition only) will be assessed by a supervisor-informed rating system, specifically developed for this study and adapted from the existing tool used at the ERiC trial (Nick Midgley, Holly Dwyer Hall and Emma Morris, Anna Freud, unpublished 2024), evaluating the quality of the therapists' mentalizing stance on four different dimensions pertaining to key MBT principles, each rated on a 4-point Likert scale, assessed across supervision sessions. Scores ≥3 per dimension are considered satisfactory. Fidelity to treatment will also be evaluated based on the percentage of key treatment activities (experiential and psychoeducational) that facilitators were able to deliver - these will be tracked by facilitators' self-report of activities conducted in each session.
Feasibility of the intervention delivery (based on participant attendance and retention)
Time frame: Attendance: From start to completion of treatment delivery (baseline to 5 months after the treatment starts) Retention: From recruitment (throughout the 2 months prior to baseline) to follow-up assessments (8 months after the treatment starts)
Attendance rates will be calculated based on the mean number of sessions attended by participants; retention rates will be calculated by the percentage of participants that have not dropped-out across different timepoints of the study; reasons for discontinuation will be assessed by qualitative feedback from participants; this data will be registered in Excel spreadsheets.
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme: perpectives from participants in the experimental condition
Time frame: At post-test assessments (5 months after the treatment starts)
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme from participants' perspective will be assessed through semi-structured interviews with participants in the experimental condition focused on their experiences of the programme, their views on the intervention's appropriateness (cultural, clinical, contextual), and potential barriers or facilitators to attending and engaging with the programme
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme: perpectives from facilitators
Time frame: At post-test assessments (5 months after the treatment starts)
Acceptability of the Lighthouse Parenting Programme from the facilitators' perspectives will be assessed through focus groups with facilitator dyads, focusing on their perceptions of the appropriateness of the intervention, barriers and facilitators to participant attendance and to the delivery of the programme
Acceptability of study procedures: perspectives from participants
Time frame: At post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up assessments (8 months after treatment starts)
Acceptability of study procedures will be assessed through: 1) Semi-structured interviews, exploring: participants' perspectives on the adequacy of study's procedures, including recruitment strategy and data collection measures (e.g., burden, clarity and relevance). Interviews will be conducted at post-test, given the risk of missing data at follow-up assessments. Participants who attend follow-up assessments will also respond to an additional interview question regarding the acceptability of the follow-up assessment procedures. Both retained participants and those who drop out will be invited to be interviewed. For participants who formally withdraw from the study, the timing of the interview will remain flexible, with priority given to conducting it as soon as possible after withdrawal.
Acceptability of study procedures: perspectives from facilitators
Time frame: At post-test assessments (5 months after the treatment starts)
Acceptability of study procedures will be assessed through focus groups with facilitator dyads, focusing on adequacy e replicability of study's procedures
7 secondary outcomes
Sociodemographic data
Time frame: At baseline
Parental history of adverse childhood experiences
Time frame: At baseline
Parental Reflective Functioning
Time frame: At baseline and post-test (5 months after the treatment starts) assessments
Child's psychological adjustment (parent-report)
Time frame: At baseline, post-test (5 months after the treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Parenting stress
Time frame: At baseline, post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Parent cognitions
Time frame: At baseline, during treatment (week 7 and week 14 into treatment), post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Parental emotion regulation difficulties
Time frame: At baseline, during treatment (week 7 and week 14 into treatment), post-test (5 months after treatment starts) and follow-up (8 months after treatment starts) assessments
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 May 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be shared. The study involves a sample recruited from small communities under highly sensitive conditions, namely referrals by Child Protection Services. Given the limited sample size and contextual specificity, there is a risk of participant re-identification even after anonymisation, particularly through the qualitative data (e.g., PDI-RF narratives). As the primary focus of the study is to assess acceptability and feasibility of intervention and research procedures, rather than examining treatment effectiveness, data sharing is not essential to achieving the study's objectives.
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Lighthouse Parenting Programme and Treatment-as-usual (TAU) in people with Being Referred for Child Protection Services, run by Universidade do Porto at 1 site in Portugal.
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 6 inclusion and 5 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: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Portugal. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Feasibility of the recruitment strategy (time frame: From recruitment (throughout the 2 months prior to baseline) to baseline assessments). The study lists 13 primary outcomes in all. 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 8 May 2026.