Objectives To compare the cumulative costs of public services used through to adulthood by individuals with three levels of antisocial behaviour in childhood. Design Costs applied to data of 10 year old children from the inner London longitudinal study selectively followed up to adulthood. Setting Inner London borough. Participants 142 individuals divided into three groups in childhood: no problems, conduct problems, and conduct disorder. Main outcome measures Costs in 1998 prices for public services (excluding private, voluntary agency, indirect, and personal costs) used over and above basic universal provision. Results By age 28, costs for individuals with conduct disorder were 10.0 times higher than for those with no problems (95% confidence interval of bootstrap ratio 3.6 to 20.9) and 3.5 times higher than for those with conduct problems (1.7 to 6.2). Mean individual total costs were £70 019 for the conduct disorder group (bootstrap mean difference from no problem group £62 898; £22 692 to £117 896) and £24 324 (£16 707; £6594 to £28 149) for the conduct problem group, compared with £7423 for the no problem group. In all groups crime incurred the greatest cost, followed by extra educational provision, foster and residential care, and state benefits; health costs were smaller. Parental social class had a relatively small effect on antisocial behaviour, and although substantial independent contributions came from being male, having a low reading age, and attending more than two primary schools, conduct disorder still predicted the greatest cost. Conclusions Antisocial behaviour in childhood is a major predictor of how much an individual will cost society. The cost is large and falls on many agencies, yet few agencies contribute to prevention, which could be cost effective.

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a brief behavioral screening questionnaire that can be completed in 5 minutes by the parents or teachers of children aged 4 to 16; there is a self-report version for 11- to 16-year-olds. In this study, mothers completed the SDQ and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) on 132 children aged 4 through 7 and drawn from psychiatric and dental clinics. Scores from the SDQ and CBCL were highly correlated and equally able to discriminate psychiatric from dental cases. As judged against a semistructured interview, the SDQ was significantly better than the CBCL at detecting inattention and hyperactivity, and at least as good at detecting internalizing and externalizing problems. Mothers of low-risk children were twice as likely to prefer the SDQ.

SummaryBackgroundBullying, aggression, and violence among children and young people are some of the most consequential public mental health problems. We tested the Learning Together intervention, which involved students in efforts to modify their school environment using restorative practice and by developing social and emotional skills.MethodsWe did a cluster randomised trial, with economic and process evaluations, of the Learning Together intervention compared with standard practice (controls) over 3 years in secondary schools in south-east England. Learning Together consisted of staff training in restorative practice; convening and facilitating a school action group; and a student social and emotional skills curriculum. Primary outcomes were self-reported experience of bullying victimisation (Gatehouse Bullying Scale; GBS) and perpetration of aggression (Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (ESYTC) school misbehaviour subscale) measured at 36 months. We analysed data using intention-to-treat longitudinal mixed-effects models. This trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry (10751359).FindingsWe included 40 schools (20 in each group); no schools withdrew. 6667 (93·6%) of 7121 students participated at baseline and 5960 (83·3%) of 7154 at 36 months. Mean GBS bullying score at 36 months was 0·34 (SE 0·02) in the control group versus 0·29 (SE 0·02) in the intervention group, with a significant adjusted mean difference (−0·03, 95% CI −0·06 to −0·001; adjusted effect size −0·08). Mean ESYTC score at 36 months was 4·33 (SE 0·20) in the control group versus 4·04 (0·21) in the intervention group, with no evidence of a difference between groups (adjusted difference −0·13, 95% CI −0·43 to 0·18; adjusted effect size −0·03). Costs were an additional £58 per pupil in intervention schools than in control schools.InterpretationLearning Together had small but significant effects on bullying, which could be important for public health, but no effect on aggression. Interventions to promote student health by modifying the whole-school environment are likely to be one of the most feasible and efficient ways of addressing closely related risk and health outcomes in children and young people.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, Educational Endowment Foundation.

Background: Children with oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder (ODD/CD) have shown deficits in 'cool' abstract-cognitive, and 'hot' reward-related executive function (EF) tasks. However, it is currently unclear to what extent ODD/CD is associated with neuropsychological deficits, independently of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: Fifty-nine adolescents with a history of early-onset oppositional problems, 28 with pure ODD/CD symptoms and 31 with ADHD with or without ODD/CD, and 34 healthy controls were administered a task battery measuring motor response inhibition, sustained attention, cognitive flexibility and reward-related decision-making. Findings were analysed using dimensional and group analyses. Results: In group analyses both groups with and without ADHD were impaired in EF measures. Dimensional analyses, however, showed that ODD/CD but not ADHD was related to hot EF based on increased risky decision-making in the Iowa Gambling Task. ODD/CD was also independently related to aspects of cool EF independently of ADHD, namely slower speeds of inhibitory responding and increased intra-subject variability. Conclusions: These findings show EF deficits associated with ODD/CD independently of ADHD, and implicate rewardrelated abnormalities in theories of antisocial behaviour development.