此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

Individual and Group Intervention Formats With Aggressive Children

2017年1月10日 更新者:National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
The planned study will randomly assign aggressive children to one of two versions of the Coping Power child component. The two versions of Coping Power will either deliver the child component of the program in the usual small group format (Group Coping Power: GCP) or in a newly-developed individual format (Individual Coping Power: ICP). By providing a direct comparison of two different formats of the same intervention, the planned study's design will fill a critical gap in our current understanding of the relative effectiveness of group vs. individual programs. Further, this study will allow for examination of the specific factors that influence relative effectiveness of these two formats, important information with broad implications for program development, training of clinicians, and intervention implementation.

研究概览

详细说明

Specific Aim 1: The study will test the hypothesis that the Coping Power intervention will produce larger effect sizes when delivered in an individual format in comparison to a group format. Although there are advantages of both formats, pilot data suggests that the group format may be diminishing the strength of outcome effects of intervention in comparison to the same intervention delivered in individual format. This pilot data is consistent with some prior findings, but a direct randomized comparison of children assigned to group versus individual formats has not been conducted, despite the critically important conceptual, clinical, and policy implications.

Hypothesis 1-1: It is hypothesized that ICP will produce greater reductions in behavior outcomes including substance use, externalizing behavior problems, and delinquency at a 1-year follow-up, in comparison to GCP.

Hypothesis 1-2: it is hypothesized that the ICP condition will produce greater improvements in children's social competence, which is directly targeted by the intervention, in comparison to GCP.

Specific Aim 2: Individual and group variation in effect sizes will be an outcome of youth behavior in the group (i.e., deviancy training) and group leader behavior management skill. We see youth behavior to be highly influenced by group leader management practices. We understand that some groups and/or individual children present challenges to even the most competent group leaders, and therefore, variation will be observable and meaningful. The design of the study allows for the testing of both group level and individual effects, and linkage of these effects to specific behaviors. Such information will provide an empirical basis for clinical training for group interventions with youth in general and Coping Power in particular.

Hypothesis 2-1: It is hypothesized that peer escalation in the GCP condition will predict worse outcomes, and that the level of group deviance in the GCP condition will moderate the effectiveness of the GCP condition, with better outcome effects for the groups with the highest initial screening scores.

Hypothesis 2-2: It is hypothesized that group interventions will be compromised by individual children's reactions to the interpersonal dynamics of the groups, such as inadvertent attention to deviant behavior and talk provided by group members and/or the group leader.

Hypothesis 2-3: It is hypothesized that level of positive group leader behaviors (directing attention to rules, correcting behavior, providing praise for compliance, introduction and review of activities, clear directions) will moderate the effectiveness of the GCP condition.

Specific Aim 3: Variability in outcome scores will differ between conditions. Hypothesis 3-1: It is hypothesized that there will be greater variability in the outcome scores of children in the GCP condition than in those of children in the ICP condition.

Specific Aim 4: Child characteristics will be examined as potential moderators of intervention effects.

Hypothesis 4-1: It is hypothesized that youth with low effortful control will be most vulnerable to deviancy effects in group interventions and therefore will show lower effect sizes than youth higher in effortful control at baseline. Thus we expect effortful control to function as a moderator of group intervention effectiveness, but not individual intervention effectiveness.

Research Question 1: In addition, we will investigate the possibility that characteristics of the youth's decision-making (impulsive decision-making; outcome expectations), affective arousal (callous-unemotional traits; low physiological arousal in response to negative consequences), temperament and behavior characteristics (baseline severity of aggressive behavior); perceived and actual peer reactions (perceived peer competence; peer rejection; peer victimization; deviant peers) and demographic characteristics (sex; age; race) will moderate the effectiveness of both interventions.

研究类型

介入性

注册 (实际的)

360

阶段

  • 不适用

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

9年 至 12年 (孩子)

接受健康志愿者

不

有资格学习的性别

全部

描述

Inclusion Criteria:

  • top 25% in teacher-rated aggression and above low-aggressive range in parent-rated aggression

Exclusion Criteria:

-

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 主要用途:预防
  • 分配:随机化
  • 介入模型:并行分配
  • 屏蔽:无(打开标签)

武器和干预

参与者组/臂
干预/治疗
实验性的:Individual Intervention
behavioral - children receive the Coping Power program in an individual, face-to-face format
34 weekly sessions of cognitive-behavioral Coping Power intervention, delivered in an individual one-to-one format
实验性的:Group Intervention
behavioral - children receive the Coping Power program in a small group format (5-6 children per group)
34 weekly sessions of Coping Power intervention, delivered in a small group format (6 children per gorup)

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
大体时间
Behavior Assessment System for Children, Externalizing Behavior
大体时间:Baseline, Mid-Intervention, Post-Intervention; 1 year follow-up
Baseline, Mid-Intervention, Post-Intervention; 1 year follow-up

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始

2008年9月1日

初级完成 (实际的)

2014年7月1日

研究完成 (实际的)

2014年7月1日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2012年10月16日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2012年10月17日

首次发布 (估计)

2012年10月19日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (估计)

2017年1月11日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2017年1月10日

最后验证

2015年4月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

其他相关的 MeSH 术语

其他研究编号

  • DESPR DA023156
  • R01DA023156 (美国 NIH 拨款/合同)

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅