IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/10.2105-ajph.2005.067462_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficacy vs effectiveness trial results of an indicated "model" substance abuse program: Implications for public health

Author

Listed:
  • Hallfors, D.
  • Cho, H.
  • Sanchez, V.
  • Khatapoush, S.
  • Hyung, M.K.
  • Bauer, D.

Abstract

Objectives. The US Department of Education requires schools to choose substance abuse and violence prevention programs that meet standards of effectiveness. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency certifies "model" programs that meet this standard. We compared findings from a large, multisite effectiveness trial of 1 model program to its efficacy trial findings, upon which the certification was based. Methods. 1370 high-risk youths were randomized to experimental or control groups across 9 high schools in 2 large urban school districts. We used intent-to-treat and on-treatment approaches to examine baseline equivalence, attrition, and group differences in outcomes at the end of the program and at a 6-month follow-up. Results. Positive efficacy trial findings were not replicated in the effectiveness trial. All main effects were either null or worse for the experimental than for the control group. Conclusions. These findings suggest that small efficacy trials conducted by developers provide insufficient evidence of effectiveness. Federal agencies and public health scientists must work together to raise the standards of evidence and ensure that data from new trials are incorporated into ongoing assessments of program effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Hallfors, D. & Cho, H. & Sanchez, V. & Khatapoush, S. & Hyung, M.K. & Bauer, D., 2006. "Efficacy vs effectiveness trial results of an indicated "model" substance abuse program: Implications for public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(12), pages 2254-2259.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2005.067462_9
    DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.067462
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2005.067462
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2105/AJPH.2005.067462?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Huey T., 2010. "The bottom-up approach to integrative validity: A new perspective for program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 205-214, August.
    2. Dennis M. Gorman & J. Charles Huber Jr, 2009. "The Social Construction of ``Evidence-Based'' Drug Prevention Programs," Evaluation Review, , vol. 33(4), pages 396-414, August.
    3. Franklin, Cynthia G.S. & Kim, Johnny S. & Ryan, Tiffany N. & Kelly, Michael S. & Montgomery, Katherine L., 2012. "Teacher involvement in school mental health interventions: A systematic review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 973-982.
    4. Gorman, Dennis M. & Conde, Eugenia, 2007. "Conflict of interest in the evaluation and dissemination of "model" school-based drug and violence prevention programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 422-429, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2005.067462_9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.