Background Childhood behavioural problems are the most common mental health disorder worldwide and represent a major public health concern, particularly in socially disadvantaged communities. Treatment barriers mean that up to 70% of children do not receive recommended parenting interventions. Innovative approaches, including evidence-based peer-led models, such as Empowering Parents Empowering Communities’ (EPEC) Being a Parent (BAP) programme, have the potential to reduce childhood difficulties and improve parenting if replicable and successfully delivered at scale. Method This real-world quasi-experimental study, with embedded RCT benchmarking, examined the population reach, attendance, acceptability and outcomes of 128 BAP groups (n = 930 parents) delivered by 15 newly established sites participating in a UK EPEC scaling programme. Results Scaling programme (SP) sites successfully reached parents living in areas of greater social deprivation (n = 476, 75.3%), experiencing significant disadvantage (45.0% left school by 16; 39.9% lived in rental accommodation; 36.9% lone parents). The only benchmarked demographic difference was ethnicity, reflecting the greater proportion of White British parents living in scaling site areas (SP 67.9%; RCT 22.4%). Benchmark comparisons showed scaling sites’ parent group leaders achieved similar levels of satisfaction. Scaling site parent participants reported substantial levels of improvement in child concerns (ES 0.6), parenting (ES 0.9), parenting goals (ES 1.2) and parent wellbeing (ES 0.6) that were of similar magnitude to RCT benchmarked results. Though large, parents reported lower levels of parenting knowledge and confidence acquisition compared with the RCT benchmark. Conclusion Despite common methodological limitations associated with real-world scaling evaluations, findings suggest that this peer-led, community-based, parenting approach may be capable of successful replication at scale and may have considerable potential to improve child and parenting difficulties, particularly for socially disadvantaged populations.

Purpose This paper aims to explore the experience of living with scars from self-injury; how people who self-injure (SI) make meaning of their scars and how these scars are a part of the identity construction process. Design/methodology/approach It is observed that 60 entries, from 25 online narrative blogs detailing the experience of living with self-injury scars, were analyzed using a contextualized thematic analysis informed by an embodied perspective. Findings The analysis generated two dominant themes: temporal aspects of identity; and social stigma and scars. Originality/value Far-reaching consequences of self-injury scars on the daily lives of people who SI was found. This included a person’s posture, clothing, choices of career, inclusion in family life, leisure activities and relationships; all of which have corollaries in emotional and psychological well-being. Scars were found to be self-narrative with particular salience given to how scars represented healing. Novel findings included the central role scars played in the resistance of self-injury stigma.

Background: Childhood behavioural are the most common mental health disorder worldwide and represent a major public health concern, particularly in socially disadvantaged communities. Treatment barriers mean that up to 70% of children do not receive recommended parenting interventions. Innovative approaches, including evidence-based peer-led models, such as Empowering Parents Empowering Communities’ (EPEC) Being a Parent (BAP) programme, have the potential to reduce childhood difficulties and improve parenting if replicable and successfully delivered at scale. Method: This real-world quasi-experimental study, with embedded RCT benchmarking, examined the population reach, attendance, acceptability and outcomes of 128 BAP groups (n=930 parents) delivered by 15 newly established sites participating in a UK EPEC scaling programme. Results: Scaling programme (SP) sites successfully reached parents living in areas of greater social deprivation (n=476, 75.3%), experiencing significant disadvantage (45.0% left school by 16; 39.9% lived in rental accommodation; 36.9% lone parents). The only benchmarked demographic difference was ethnicity, reflecting the greater proportion of White British parents living in scaling site areas (SP 67.9%; RCT 22.4%). Benchmark comparisons showed scaling sites’ parent group leaders achieved similar levels of satisfaction. Scaling site parent participants reported substantial levels of improvement in child concerns (ES 0.6), parenting (ES 0.9), parenting goals (ES 1.2) and parent wellbeing (ES 0.6) that were of similar magnitude to RCT benchmarked results. Though large, parents reported lower levels of parenting knowledge and confidence acquisition compared with the RCT benchmark. Conclusion: Despite common methodological limitations associated with real-world scaling evaluations, findings suggest that this peer-led, community-based, parenting approaches can be replicated at scale and may have considerable potential to improve child and parenting difficulties, particularly for socially disadvantaged populations.