There is a lack of evidence-based app guidance for parents of children with crying, sleeping, and feeding problems who are often highly burdened and not likely to seek professional help. A new psychoeducational app for parents providing scientifically sound information via text and videos, a diary function, selfcare strategies, a chat forum and a regional directory of specialized counseling centers may serve as a low-threshold intervention for this target group. We investigated how parents perceived the app in terms of the following: (1) overall impression and usability, (2) feedback on specific app functions regarding usefulness and (3) possible future improvements. Our clinical sample of N = 137 parents of children aged from 0 to 24 months was recruited from a cry baby outpatient clinic in Southern Germany between 2019 and 2022. A convergent parallel mixed methods design was used to collect and analyse cross-sectional data on app evaluation. After app use within the framework of a clinical trial, parents filled in an app evaluation questionnaire. Most participants used the app at least once a week (86, 62.8 %) over an average period of 19.06 days (SD = 15.00). Participants rated overall impression and usability as good, and the informational texts, expert videos and regional register of counseling centers as appealing and useful. The diary function and chat forum were found to be helpful in theory, but improvements in implementation were requested, such as a timer function for the diary entry. Regarding future functionality, parents posed several suggestions such as the option to contact counseling centers directly via app, and the inclusion of the profile of their partners. Positive ratings of overall impression, usability, and specific app functions are important prerequisites for the app to be effective. App-based guidance for this target group should include easy-to-use information. The app is intended to serve as a secondary preventive low-threshold offer and to complement professional counseling.

Longitudinal research on the adverse consequences of childhood maltreatment has recently gained significant traction. However, systematic attrition, partly due to specific subsample recruitment needs, threatens the validity of this research. Furthermore, studies specifically analyzing these factors in the field of maltreatment research remain scarce. We utilized data from a longitudinal study comprising N = 863 participants ( M _Age = 10.23 years, 47.5% female) and their caregivers at T1, and 616 participants ( M _Age = 17.95 years, 50.0% female) at T2. We determined the attrition rate and analyzed psychosocial and socioeconomic predictors of attrition. Additionally, we examined differences in re-assessment efforts between maltreated and non-maltreated youth for T2. Findings indicate a comparatively low attrition rate of 28.6% over nearly 8 years. Participants’ maltreatment experiences, externalizing symptoms, and lower household income predicted higher attrition risk, while interim subsample study participation reduced this risk. Maltreatment experiences, lower household income, and higher age were also associated with increased re-assessment effort. Our study provides insights into predictors of systematic attrition in a longitudinal study with maltreated and non-maltreated youth. It highlights the need for tailored retention strategies, frequent contact with families, and targeted resource allocation to mitigate systematic attrition.

Background/Objectives: Parenting stress is associated with parent and child mental health problems and has increased since the beginning of COVID-19. Research on paternal parenting stress is sparse—even if family models are changing increasingly with fathers being more strongly involved in caregiving for their children. This study investigated (1) overall parenting stress levels and specific parenting stress subscales in fathers with young children in comparison to mothers and (2) potential influencing factors on fathers’ and mothers’ parenting stress during the pandemic. Methods: In a cross-sectional online study, N = 368 parents (50.00% fathers) of children (0–3 years) filled out the German version of the Parenting Stress Index (EBI) and answered questions on sociodemographic and pandemic-related factors. Results: Fathers were 36.17 years (SD = 5.21) and mothers 33.65 years (SD = 4.39) old and 67.50% had a high educational background. Children (45.38% female) were 16.34 months (SD = 11.66) old. There was no significant group difference between fathers’ and mothers’ overall parenting stress (p = 0.39). Parenting stress scores in the attachment subscale were significantly higher in fathers (p < 0.001, r = 0.19). An increase in family conflicts during the pandemic had the highest impact on both paternal (ß = 0.45) and maternal (ß = 0.35) parenting stress. Conclusions: Parenting stress was equally high for fathers and mothers during the COVID-19 crisis, indicating a levelling of pre-pandemic differences due to pandemic-related factors. Future support measures should focus on reducing family conflicts and on strengthening fathers’ attachment to their child.