This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by MURRAY, D. M. Articles by DENT, C. W. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Design and Analysis Issues in Community-Based Drug Abuse Prevention

University of Minnesota

JOEL M. MOSKOWITZ

University of California, Berkeley

CLYDE W. DENT

University of Southern California

This article reviews the design and analysis issues that face community-based drug abuse prevention trials. Such trials allocate intact social groups to study conditions and fall within the general class of studies called "community trials." Special concerns for community trials include selection bias, differential mortality and maturation, contamination, poorly defined constructs, weak interventions, violation of assumptions underlying analysis methods, and low power. Potential solutions include careful selection of comparison units, tight control over distribution of intervention materials, matching, randomization, adding more units to each condition or more frequent observations in each unit, monitoring exposure to intervention-like activities in all sites, regression adjustment for covariates, modeling time, and selection of an appropriate analysis model. Four approaches to analysis are illustrated in an example based on an adolescent tobacco use prevention study.

American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 39, No. 7, 853-867 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0002764296039007007


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. J. Rice and K. Records HIPAA's Preconsent: Impact on Study Validity Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, June 1, 2008; 14(3): 225 - 230. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Boruch, H. May, H. Turner, J. Lavenberg, A. Petrosino, D. de Moya, J. Grimshaw, and E. Foley Estimating the Effects of Interventions That are Deployed in Many Places: Place-Randomized Trials American Behavioral Scientist, January 1, 2004; 47(5): 608 - 633. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. N. D'Onofrio, J. M. Moskowitz, and M. T. Braverman Curtailing Tobacco Use Among Youth: Evaluation of Project 4-Health Health Educ Behav, December 1, 2002; 29(6): 656 - 682. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. J. McCuller, S. Sussman, K. Holiday, S. Craig, and C. W. Dent Tracking Procedures for Locating High-Risk Youth Eval Health Prof, September 1, 2002; 25(3): 345 - 362. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Rindskopf and L. Saxe Zero Effects in Substance Abuse Programs: Avoiding False Positives and False Negatives in the Evaluation of Community-Based Programs Eval Rev, February 1, 1998; 22(1): 78 - 94. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. I. DONALDSON, S. SUSSMAN, D. P. MacKINNON, H. H. SEVERSON, T. GLYNN, D. M. MURRAY, and E. J. STONE Drug Abuse Prevention Programming: Do We Know What Content Works? American Behavioral Scientist, June 1, 1996; 39(7): 868 - 883. [Abstract]

				C. A. JOHNSON, J. W. FARQUHAR, and S. SUSSMAN Methodological and Substantive Issues in Substance Abuse Prevention Research: An Integration American Behavioral Scientist, June 1, 1996; 39(7): 935 - 942. [Abstract]