BackgroundDespite robust evidence of fathers’ impact on children and mothers, engaging with fathers is one of the least well-explored and articulated aspects of parenting interventions. It is therefore critical to evaluate implicit and explicit biases manifested in current approaches to research, intervention, and policy.MethodsWe conducted a systematic database and a thematic hand search of the global literature on parenting interventions. Studies were selected from Medline, Psychinfo, SSCI, and Cochrane databases, and from gray literature on parenting programs, using multiple search terms for parent, father, intervention, and evaluation. We tabulated single programs and undertook systematic quality coding to review the evidence base in terms of the scope and nature of data reporting.ResultsAfter screening 786 nonduplicate records, we identified 199 publications that presented evidence on father participation and impact in parenting interventions. With some notable exceptions, few interventions disaggregate ‘father’ or ‘couple’ effects in their evaluation, being mostly driven by a focus on the mother–child dyad. We identified seven key barriers to engaging fathers in parenting programs, pertaining to cultural, institutional, professional, operational, content, resource, and policy considerations in their design and delivery.ConclusionsBarriers to engaging men as parents work against father inclusion as well as father retention, and undervalue coparenting as contrasted with mothering. Robust evaluations of father participation and father impact on child or family outcomes are stymied by the ways in which parenting interventions are currently designed, delivered, and evaluated. Three key priorities are to engage fathers and coparenting couples successfully, to disaggregate process and impact data by fathers, mothers, and coparents, and to pay greater attention to issues of reach, sustainability, cost, equity, and scale-up. Clarity of purpose with respect to gender-differentiated and coparenting issues in the design, delivery, and evaluation of parenting programs will constitute a game change in this field.

ObjectiveTo assess (1) the feasibility of delivering a culturally adapted weight management programme, Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids United Kingdom (HDHK-UK), for fathers with overweight or obesity and their primary school-aged children, and (2) the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT).DesignA two-arm, randomised feasibility trial with a mixed-methods process evaluation.SettingSocioeconomically disadvantaged, ethnically diverse localities in West Midlands, UK.ParticipantsFathers with overweight or obesity and their children aged 4–11 years.InterventionParticipants were randomised in a 1:2 ratio to control (family voucher for a leisure centre) or intervention comprising 9 weekly healthy lifestyle group sessions.OutcomesFeasibility of the intervention and RCT was assessed according to prespecified progression criteria: study recruitment, consent and follow-up, ability to deliver intervention, intervention fidelity, adherence and acceptability, weight loss, using questionnaires and measurements at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and through qualitative interviews.ResultsThe study recruited 43 men, 48% of the target sample size; the mean body mass index was 30.2 kg/m2 (SD 5.1); 61% were from a minority ethnic group; and 54% were from communities in the most disadvantaged quintile for socioeconomic deprivation. Recruitment was challenging. Retention at follow-up of 3 and 6 months was 63%. Identifying delivery sites and appropriately skilled and trained programme facilitators proved difficult. Four programmes were delivered in leisure centres and community venues. Of the 29 intervention participants, 20 (69%) attended the intervention at least once, of whom 75% attended ≥5 sessions. Sessions were delivered with high fidelity. Participants rated sessions as ‘good/very good’ and reported lifestyle behavioural change. Weight loss at 6 months in the intervention group (n=17) was 2.9 kg (95% CI −5.1 to −0.6).ConclusionsThe intervention was well received, but there were significant challenges in recruitment, programme delivery and follow-up. The HDHK-UK study was not considered feasible for progression to a full RCT based on prespecified stop–go criteria.Trial registration number ISRCTN16724454.

Background More men than women in the UK are living with overweight or obesity, but men are less likely to engage with weight loss programmes. Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids is an effective Australian weight management programme that targets fathers, who participate with their primary school-aged children. Behavioural interventions do not always transfer between contexts, so an adaptation of the Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids programme to an ethnically diverse UK setting was trialled. Objectives To adapt and test the Australian Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids programme for delivery to men in an ethnically diverse, socioeconomically disadvantaged UK setting. Design Phase 1a studied the cultural adaptation of the Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids programme and was informed by qualitative data from fathers and other family members, and a theoretical framework. Phase 1b was an uncontrolled feasibility trial. Phase 2 was a randomised controlled feasibility trial. Setting Two ethnically diverse, socioeconomically disadvantaged UK cities. Participants In phase 1a, participants were parents and family members from black and minority ethnic groups and/or socioeconomically deprived localities. In phases 1b and 2, participants were fathers with overweight or obesity and their children aged 4–11 years. Interventions The adapted Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids intervention comprised nine sessions that targeted diet and physical activity and incorporated joint father–child physical activity. Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids was delivered in two programmes in phase 1b and four programmes in phase 2. Those in the comparator arm in phase 2 received a family voucher to attend a local sports centre. Main outcome measures The following outcomes were measured: recruitment to the trial, retention, intervention fidelity, attendance, feasibility of trial processes and collection of outcome data. Results Forty-three fathers participated (intervention group, n = 29) in phase 2 (48% of recruitment target), despite multiple recruitment locations. Fathers’ mean body mass index was 30.2 kg/m2 (standard deviation 5.1 kg/m2); 60.2% were from a minority ethnic group, with a high proportion from disadvantaged localities. Twenty-seven (63%) fathers completed follow-up at 3 months. Identifying sites for delivery at a time that was convenient for the families, with appropriately skilled programme facilitators, proved challenging. Four programmes were delivered in leisure centres and community venues. Of the participants who attended the intervention at least once (n = 20), 75% completed the programme (attended five or more sessions). Feedback from participants rated the sessions as ‘good’ or ‘very good’ and participants reported behavioural change. Researcher observations of intervention delivery showed that the sessions were delivered with high fidelity. Conclusions The intervention was well delivered and received, but there were significant challenges in recruiting overweight men, and follow-up rates at 3 and 6 months were low. We do not recommend progression to a definitive trial as it was not feasible to deliver the Healthy Dads, Healthy Kids programme to fathers living with overweight and obesity in ethnically diverse, socioeconomically deprived communities in the UK. More work is needed to explore the optimal ways to engage fathers from ethnically diverse socioeconomically deprived populations in research. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16724454. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 8, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

No abstract

Among interventions that seek to improve parenting skills, the evidence base on fathers' participation is small, methodologically weak and overwhelmingly from the global north (Western contexts). A systematic review (Panter‐Brick et al. 2014) identified only 92 interventions that disaggregated findings by sex‐of‐parent. Sample sizes of fathers were usually small, the impact of engaging with both parents was almost never measured and evaluation design was weak. Mothers, fathers, and children benefit when fathers are engaged in parenting support. Engaging both parents is usually more effective than engaging just one. Content, style, methods, goals, and facilitator training may need to be modified if fathers are to be successfully included. Fathers' impact on children's development is substantial, for good and ill. Marginalizing such important players in parenting interventions, amounts to poor professional practice and may compromise the safety of mothers and children.