Adolescent Substance Use Outcomes in the Raising Healthy Children Project: A Two-Part Latent Growth Curve Analysis.

Social Development Research Group, University of Washington, Seattle, 98115, USA.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (Impact Factor: 4.85). 08/2005; 73(4):699-710. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.4.699
Source: PubMed


Raising Healthy Children (RHC) is a preventive intervention designed to promote positive youth development by targeting developmentally appropriate risk and protective factors. In this study, the authors tested the efficacy of the RHC intervention on reducing adolescent alcohol, marijuana, and cigarette use. Ten public schools, which comprised 959 1st- and 2nd-grade students (54% male students, 18% minority, 28% low socioeconomic status), were matched and assigned randomly to either intervention or control conditions. A 2-part latent growth modeling strategy was used to examine change in both use-versus-nonuse and frequency-of-use outcomes while students were in Grades 6-10. Results indicated significant (p < .05) intervention effects in growth trajectories for frequency of alcohol and marijuana use but not for use versus nonuse. These findings provide support for preventive interventions that take a social development perspective in targeting empirically supported risk and protective factors and demonstrate the use of 2-part models in adolescent substance use research.

Download full-text


Available from: Charles B Fleming
  • Source
    • "For the number of hours worked per week, a two-part LGM was used. Two-part models are appropriate for data that include a preponderance of zeros (Brown et al. 2005), such as the number of hours worked per week. Many participants worked 0 h per week in at least one wave. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Critics of emerging adulthood theory have suggested that it only applies to college students, but this assertion has largely gone untested. The purpose of the present study was to compare developmental trajectories of non-students versus college-educated youth in theoretically relevant domains of work, love, and financial independence. Using data from the Youth Development Study (N = 1139, 49.6 % female, 63.3 % White, 10.9 % Southeast Asian, 1.5 % Other Asian, 8.6 % Black, 5.3 % Mixed Race, 4.0 % Latino, 0.8 % Native American), latent growth curve models were fitted to chart each group's development, from ages 14 to 30. Different trajectories were revealed for hours worked, children, and financial dependence on parents, spouses, and government aid. No differences were found in employment rates, marriage rates, or financial dependence on own income. These results provide a clearer picture of emerging adulthood for non-students, and highlight problems with generalizing college student research to all emerging adults.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2015 · Journal of Youth and Adolescence
  • Source
    • "Multilevel family support preventions are as common as indicated preventions and – like indicated preventions – were relatively rare compared with universal and selective programs.3 The multilevel family support prevention programs included in this review are described in Table 7. Beneficial child outcomes associated with multilevel family support preventions included reductions in externalizing behavior88,89 and internalizing problems,90 as well as improved prosocial behavior.88 Participation in more intensive prevention levels accounted for two programs’ beneficial effects,90,91 and one study reported an interaction effect wherein intervention participants at highest initial risk evidenced reductions in diagnoses and behavioral symptoms.92 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Family support programs aim to improve parent wellbeing and parenting as well as adolescent mental and behavioral health by addressing the needs of parents of adolescents experiencing or at risk for mental health problems. Family support programs can be part of the treatment for adolescents diagnosed with mental or behavioral health problems, or family support programs can be delivered as prevention programs designed to prevent the onset or escalation of mental or behavioral health problems. This review discusses the rationale for family support programs and describes the range of services provided by family support programs. The primary focus of the review is on evaluating the effectiveness of family support programs as treatments or prevention efforts delivered by clinicians or peers. Two main themes emerged from the review. First, family support programs that included more forms of support evidenced higher levels of effectiveness than family support programs that provided fewer forms of support. Discussion of this theme focuses on individual differences in client needs and program adaptions that may facilitate meeting diverse needs. Second, family support prevention programs appear to be most effective when serving individuals more in need of mental and behavioral health services. Discussion of this theme focuses on the intensity versus breadth of the services provided in prevention programs. More rigorous evaluations of family support programs are needed, especially for peer-delivered family support treatments.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2014 · Adolescent Health, Medicine and Therapeutics
  • Source
    • "Unlike many of the programs included in the CASEL report, a study of the RULER feeling words curriculum included more economically advantaged 5th-and 6th-grade children, although specific information about the participants' race/ethnicity or SES was not included (Brackett et al. 2012). Also, an evaluation study of the Raising Healthy Children SEL program offered to mostly Caucasian American students demonstrated that low-income children in the primary grades are at a higher risk pre-and post-intervention for heightened rates of substance abuse, but the study did not compare the low-income children to their more advantaged peers (Brown et al. 2005). Lower income African American children who received the HighScope Perry Preschool also showed lower delinquency as teens and lower criminal activity and more stable family environments into adulthood (Belfield et al. 2006; Farnworth et al. 1985; Heckman et al. 2010; Muennig et al. 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The primary goal of this article is to situate the findings from evidence-based studies of social emotional learning (SEL) interventions into a broader social context by reframing the discussion to consider how aspects of sociocultural competence impact the development and delivery of programs. The limitations of current SEL intervention efforts are discussed and a multilevel heuristic model that identifies and defines the theoretical constructs that we believe are culturally bound and associated with the content, implementation, and evaluation components of SEL intervention programs is presented. We point out constraints associated with this effort and offer specific strategies and activities by which school personnel involved in these activities can be encouraged to embrace socioculturally based SEL practices in their classrooms and offer guidance for future research.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2014 · Educational Psychology Review
Show more