%0 Journal Article %J J Prim Prev %D 2015 %T Predictors of participation in parenting workshops for improving adolescent behavioral and mental health: Results from the Common Sense Parenting trial. %A Fleming, Charles B %A Mason, W A %A Haggerty, Kevin P %A Thompson, Ronald W %A Fernandez, Kate %A Casey-Goldstein, Mary %A Oats, Robert G %K Adolescent %K Adolescent Behavior %K Adult %K Ethnic Groups %K Family Characteristics %K Female %K Humans %K Logistic Models %K Male %K Mental Health %K Parent-Child Relations %K Parenting %K Parents %K Poverty Areas %K Program Evaluation %K Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic %K Social Class %K Washington %X

Engaging and retaining participants are crucial to achieving adequate implementation of parenting interventions designed to prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents. This study examined predictors of engagement and retention in a group-based family intervention across two versions of the program: a standard version requiring only parent attendance for six sessions and an adapted version with two additional sessions that required attendance by the son or daughter. Families included a parent and an eighth grader who attended one of five high-poverty schools in an urban Pacific Northwest school district. The adapted version of the intervention had a higher rate of engagement than the standard version, a difference that was statistically significant after adjusting for other variables assessed at enrollment in the study. Higher household income and parent education, younger student age, and poorer affective quality in the parent-child relationship predicted greater likelihood of initial attendance. In the adapted version of the intervention, parents of boys were more likely to engage with the program than those of girls. The variables considered did not strongly predict retention, although retention was higher among parents of boys. Retention did not significantly differ between conditions. Asking for child attendance at workshops may have increased engagement in the intervention, while findings for other predictors of attendance point to the need for added efforts to recruit families who have less socioeconomic resources, as well as families who perceive they have less need for services.

%B J Prim Prev %V 36 %P 105-18 %8 2015 Apr %G eng %N 2 %1 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25656381?dopt=Abstract %R 10.1007/s10935-015-0386-3 %0 Journal Article %J Prev Sci %D 2014 %T A framework for testing and promoting expanded dissemination of promising preventive interventions that are being implemented in community settings. %A Mason, W A %A Fleming, Charles B %A Thompson, Ronald W %A Haggerty, Kevin P %A Snyder, James J %K Diffusion of Innovation %K Evidence-Based Medicine %K Female %K Health Promotion %K Humans %K Male %K Preventive Health Services %K Program Development %K Registries %K United States %X

Many evidence-based preventive interventions have been developed in recent years, but few are widely used. With the current focus on efficacy trials, widespread dissemination and implementation of evidence-based interventions are often afterthoughts. One potential strategy for reversing this trend is to find a promising program with a strong delivery vehicle in place and improve and test the program's efficacy through rigorous evaluation. If the program is supported by evidence, the dissemination vehicle is already in place and potentially can be expanded. This strategy has been used infrequently and has met with limited success to date, in part, because the field lacks a framework for guiding such research. To address this gap, we outline a framework for moving promising preventive interventions that are currently being implemented in community settings through a process of rigorous testing and, if needed, program modification in order to promote expanded dissemination. The framework is guided by RE-AIM (Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) (Glasgow et al., Am J Publ Health 89:1322-1327, 1999), which focuses attention on external as well as internal validity in program tests, and is illustrated with examples. Challenges, such as responding to negative and null results, and opportunities inherent in the framework are discussed.

%B Prev Sci %V 15 %P 674-83 %8 2014 Oct %G eng %N 5 %R 10.1007/s11121-013-0409-3