Reducing Risk Behavior with Family-Centered Prevention During the Young Adult Years
- 254 Downloads
Family-centered prevention is effective at reducing risk behavior throughout the life span and promoting healthy development. Despite research that suggests parents continue to play a significant role in the lives of their children during emerging adulthood, very few studies have examined effective family-centered strategies for preventing risk behavior in young adults. Typical prevention efforts for this age group have focused on college students and substance use prevention, with no integration of families or systems of support that may sustain the effects of the intervention. In this study, we evaluated a version of the Family Check-Up (FCU) that was adapted for young adults and their families, the Young Adult Family Check-Up (YA-FCU). Families were randomly assigned to receive the FCU or school as usual during the middle school years. Ten years later, they were offered the YA-FCU, which was adapted for families of emerging adult children. Intent-to-treat and complier average causal effect analyses were used to examine change in young adult risk behavior approximately 1 year after receiving the YA-FCU. Analyses indicated that random assignment alone or simple engagement was not associated with reductions in young adult risk behavior. However, dose-response analyses indicated that the more hours that youth and families were engaged in the YA-FCU, the greater the reductions in young adult risk behavior relative to those who did not engage or engaged very little in the intervention, resulting in a medium effect size of the YA-FCU on risk behavior.
KeywordsFamily intervention Risk behavior Emerging adulthood Development Prevention
This research was funded by NIDA and NICHD (grants DA 018374 and HD 075150 to the first author).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
There authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects, and procedures were approved by the University of Oregon IRB.
- Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2003). Manual for the ASEBA Adult Forms & Profiles. Burlington: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families.Google Scholar
- Brody, G. H., Yu, T., Chen, Y. F., Kogan, S. M., & Smith, K. (2012). The Adults in the Making program: Long-term protective stabilizing effects on alcohol use and substance use problems for rural African American emerging adults. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80, 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Brown, H. C., Wang, W., Kellam, S. G., Muthén, B. O., Petras, H., Toyinbo, P., et al. (2008). Methods for testing theory and evaluating impact in randomized field trials: Intent-to-treat analyses for integrating the perspectives of person, place, and time. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95, S74–S104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.11.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Carey, K. B., Scott-Sheldon, L. A., Elliott, J. C., Garey, L., & Carey, M. P. (2012). Face-to-face versus computer-delivered alcohol interventions for college drinkers: A meta-analytic review, 1998 to 2010. Clinical Psychology Review, 32, 690–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. (2015). Behavioral health trends in the United States: Results from the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. HHS Publication No. SMA 15-4927, NSDUH Series H-50. Retrieved from http://www.samhsa.gov/data/.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Ten leading causes of death and injury. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/LeadingCauses.html. Accessed 6/29/17.
- Child and Family Center. (2001). CFC Youth Questionnaire. Unpublished instrument, Child and Family Center, 6217 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403.Google Scholar
- Collins, L., Murphy, S., & Bierman, K. (2004). A conceptual framework for adaptive preventive interventions. Prevention Science, 5, 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000037641.26017.00.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ferrer-Wreder, L., Cadely, H. S.-E., Domitrovich, C. E., Small, M. L., Caldwell, L. L., & Cleveland, M. J. (2010). Is more better? Outcome and dose of a universal drug prevention effectiveness trial. Journal of Primary Prevention, 31, 349–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-010-0226-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jo, B., & Muthén, B. (2001). Modeling of intervention effects with noncompliance: A latent variable approach for randomized trials. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 57–87). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., Schulenberg, J. E., & Miech, R. A. (2016). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2015: Volume 2, College students and adults ages 19–55. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
- Kerr, D. C., Bae, H., Phibbs, S., & Kern, A. C. (2017). Changes in undergraduates’ marijuana, heavy alcohol, and cigarette use following legalization of recreational marijuana use in Oregon. Addiction. Advance online. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13906.
- Marsiglia, F. F., Kulis, S., Yabiku, S. T., Nieri, T. A., & Coleman, E. (2011). When to intervene: Elementary school, middle school or both? Effects of Keepin’ It REAL on substance use trajectories of Mexican heritage youth. Prevention Science, 12, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-010-0189-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2015). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- Patrick, M. E., Terry-McElrath, Y. M., Miech, R. A., Schulenberg, J. E., O'Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2017). Age-specific prevalence of binge and high-intensity drinking among US young adults: Changes from 2005 to 2015. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. Advance online. https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.13413.
- Pew Research Center. (2016). For first time in modern era, living with parents edges out other living arrangements for 18- to 34-year-olds. Available at http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/. 2016/05/24/. Accessed 6/29/17.
- Stormshak, E. A., Connell, A. M., Véronneau, M.-H., Myers, M. W., Dishion, T. J., Kavanagh, K., & Caruthers, A. S. (2011). An ecological approach to promoting early adolescent mental health and social adaptation: Family-centered intervention in public middle schools. Child Development, 82, 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01551.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stormshak, E. A., DeGarmo, D. D., Chronister, K. M., & Caruthers, A. (2018). The impact of family-centered prevention on self-regulation and subsequent long-term risk in emerging adults. Prevention Science, 19, 549–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-017-0852-7.
- Van Ryzin, M. J., Stormshak, E. A., & Dishion, T. J. (2012). Engaging parents in the Family Check-Up in middle school: Longitudinal effects on family conflict and problem behavior through the transition to high school. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50, 627–633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.10.255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- West, S. G., & Sagarin, B. J. (2000). Participant selection and loss in randomized experiments. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Research design (pp. 117–154). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Wood, M. D., Fairlie, A. M., Fernandez, A. C., Borsari, B., Capone, C., Laforge, R., & Carmona-Barros, R. (2010). Brief motivational and parent interventions for college students: A randomized factorial study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar