Background-The Good Behavior Game (GBG), a method of classroom behavior management used by teachers, was tested in first-and second-grade classrooms in 19 Baltimore City Public * Supplementary data on Cohort 2 and additional information on the Good Behavior Game intervention are available with the online version of this paper at http://dx.doi.org by entering doi: xxxxxxxx.Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Schools beginning in the 1985-1986 school year. The intervention was directed at the classroom as a whole to socialize children to the student role and reduce aggressive, disruptive behaviors, confirmed antecedents of later substance abuse and dependence disorders, smoking, and antisocial personality disorder. This article reports on impact to age 19-21. NIH Public AccessMethods-In five poor to lower-middle class, mainly African American urban areas, three or four schools were matched and within each set randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 1) GBG, 2) a curriculum-and-instruction program directed at reading achievement, or 3) the standard program. Balanced assignment of children to classrooms was made, and then, within intervention schools, classrooms and teachers were randomly assigned to intervention or control.Results-By young adulthood significant impact was found among males, particularly those in first grade who were more aggressive, disruptive, in reduced drug and alcohol abuse/dependence disorders, regular smoking, and antisocial personality disorder. These results underline the value of a first-grade universal prevention intervention.Replication-A replication was implemented with the next cohort of first-grade children with the same teachers during the following school year, but with diminished mentoring and monitoring of teachers. The results showed significant GBG impact for males on drug abuse/dependence disorders with some variation. For other outcomes the effects were generally smaller but in the same direction.

Hawaii's Healthy Start Program (HSP) is designed to prevent child abuse and neglect and to promote child health and development in newborns of families at risk for poor child outcomes. The program operates statewide in Hawaii and has inspired national and international adaptations, including Healthy Families America. This article describes HSP, its ongoing evaluation study, and evaluation findings at the end of two of a planned three years of family program participation and follow-up. After two years of service provision to families, HSP was successful in linking families with pediatric medical care, improving maternal parenting efficacy, decreasing maternal parenting stress, promoting the use of nonviolent discipline, and decreasing injuries resulting from partner violence in the home. No overall positive program impact emerged after two years of service in terms of the adequacy of well-child health care; maternal life skills, mental health, social support, or substance use; child development; the child's home learning environment or parent-child interaction; pediatric health care use for illness or injury; or child maltreatment (according to maternal reports and child protective services reports). However, there were agency-specific positive program effects on several outcomes, including parent-child interaction, child development, maternal confidence in adult relationships, and partner violence. Significant differences were found in program implementation between the three administering agencies included in the evaluation. These differences had implications for family participation and involvement levels and, possibly, for outcomes achieved. The authors conclude that home visiting programs and evaluations should monitor program implementation for faithfulness to the program model, and should employ comparison groups to determine program impact.

No abstract

Randomized field trials provide unique opportunities to examine the effectiveness of an intervention in real world settings and to test and extend both theory of etiology and theory of intervention. These trials are designed not only to test for overall intervention impact but also to examine how impact varies as a function of individual level characteristics, context, and across time. Examination of such variation in impact requires analytical methods that take into account the trial's multiple nested structure and the evolving changes in outcomes over time. The models that we describe here merge multilevel modeling with growth modeling, allowing for variation in impact to be represented through discrete mixtures-growth mixture models-and nonparametric smooth functions-generalized additive mixed models. These methods are part of an emerging class of multilevel growth mixture models, and we illustrate these with models that examine overall impact and variation in impact. In this paper, we define intent-to-treat analyses in group-randomized multilevel field trials and discuss appropriate ways to identify, examine, and test for variation in impact without inflating the Type I error rate. We describe how to make causal inferences more robust to misspecification of covariates * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 813 974 6672. E-mail address: hbrown@health.usf.edu (C.H. Brown). Conflict of InterestAuthor Muthén is a co-developer of Mplus, which is discussed in this paper. There are no conflicts of interest. in such analyses and how to summarize and present these interactive intervention effects clearly. Practical strategies for reducing model complexity, checking model fit, and handling missing data are discussed using six randomized field trials to show how these methods may be used across trials randomized at different levels. NIH Public Access