Skip to main content

Table 2 Excluded studies that target to a specific group. Targeted studies not included in the analysis and to which group the intervention was targeted towards

From: Examining subgroup effects by socioeconomic status of public health interventions targeting multiple risk behaviour in adolescence

Primary Authors Trial Targeted to which group
Bernstein 2010 [66] Reaching Adolescents for Prevention Young people with high levels of risk behaviour
Berry 2009 [67] Coaching for Communities Young people with at least one of five key risk factors
Bond et al. 2001 [68] Gatehouse Government, independent and Catholic schools
Brody 2012a [69] Adults in the making Targeted to African American families in rural Georgia
Brody 2012b [69] SAAF-T Targeted to African American families in rural Georgia
Bush 1989 [70] Know Your Body 2 Black students in Columbia district
Catalano 1999 [71] Focus on Families Parents in methadone treatment and their children
Clark et al. 2010 [72] SUCCESS Youth with behavioural problems
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group 2014 [73] Fast Track Children with conduct problems
Cunningham 2012 [74] SafERteens Hazardous and harmful adolescent drinkers attending emergency department unit
Elder et al. 2002 [75] Migrant education Migrants - predominantly Mexican
Fang 2010 [76] Mother-Daughter - Asian-American Asian-American adolescent girls - second generation from socioeconomically advantaged backgrounds
Flay 2004 [77] Aban Aya Predominantly African-American schools, high risk sample
Freudenberg 2010 [78] REAL MEN Male participants recruited in prisons
Friedman 2002 [79] Botvin LST and Anti-Violence Inner-city, low SES, court adjudicated males convicted of at least one offence
Gersick 1988 [80] Gersick Public schools from predominantly working and lower -middle class towns
Gilchrist et al. 1987 [81] Skills enchancement prog American Indian youth
Gonzales [82] Bridges to High School Family program targeted to Mexican Americans
Griffin 2009 [83] BRAVE Inner city African-American majority
Hallfors et al. 2006 [84] Reconnecting youth Identified by school as being high risk - top 25% for truancy and bottom 50% for GPA or referral by school teacher/counsellor
Horan et al. 1982 [85] Assertion training Those with the lowest Assertive Behaviour Test (ABT) scores i.e. least assertive individuals
Kim 2011 [86] Middle School Success Girls in foster care, who are about to enter middle school
Kitzman 2010 [87] Nurse Family Partnership 2 Females less than 29 weeks gestation, with socio-demographic risk characteristics
Komro et al. 2008 [88] Project northland Urban, multi-ethnic and low-income population
Lewis 2013 [89] Positive Action (Chicago) Undergraduates engaged in alcohol or sexual risk behaviour
Li 2002 [90] imPACT African-American parent-adolescent dyads
Lochman 2003 [91] Coping Power 1 Targeted at children at risk of aggressive/disruptive behaviour
Lochman 2004 [92] Coping Power 2 Targeted at boys at risk of aggressive or disruptive behaviour
LoSciuto 1999 [93] Woodrock Youth Development Project Deprived community, with large % of children from families receiving financial assistance from state
Marsden et al. 2006 [94] Marsden Users of ecstasy, crack cocaine or powder cocaine
McBride-Murray 2014 [95] SAAF Rural African American
McCambridge et al. 2011 [96] Motivational interviewing 2011 Mainly those who had not completed Level 2 education (i.e. not achieved conventional measure of educational attainment on completion of compulsory schooling
Milburn 2012 [97] STRIVE Newly homeless youth and their families
Minnis 2014 [98] Yo Puedo Latino participants aged 16–21 years, residing in San Francisco
Monti 1999 [99] Alcohol Screen and B.I. 1 Individuals aged 18–19 years, with drink-related emergency department attendances
Morris 2003 [100] Self-Sufficiency Project Targeted at low income single parent families from 2 Provinces in Canada
Newton et al. 2009 [101] Climate schools Independent (private) schools
Nirenberg 2013 [102] ROAD Targeted to youth with a high risk driving or alcohol prior drug-related police charge
Nores 2005 [103] High/Scope Perry High risk children
Palinkas et al. 1996 [104] Social skills training Pregnant and non-pregnant (at risk for pregnancy) adolescents using/at risk of using drugs
Pantin 2009 [105] Familias Unidas Hispanic adolescents in grade 8 with behavioural problems, and their primary caregivers
Redding 2015 [106] Step-by-Step Females, aged 14–17 years, not pregnant
Sanchez 2007 [107] Reconnecting youth Targeted to persons experimenting with drugs or other risk-related behaviours
Schwinn 2010 [108] RealTeen Targeted to girls living in public subsidized housing
Shetgiri 2011 [109] Shetgiri Study High-risk status based on:
rate of absence of 80% and above, 2 or more disciplinary actions in 8th grade, failing two or more classes in 8th grade, or high levels of family dysfunction identified by grade teacher, using proxies such as multiple family moves in grade 8, perceived lack of parental involvement or family conflict
Sussman et al. 1998 [110] Towards no drug abuse - School-as-community Continuation high school youth at high risk of drug use
Tierney 1995 [111] Big Brothers Big Sisters Youth from single parent households recruited for mentoring
Vitaro et al. 1996 [112] SAPP Young boys and girls with behaviour problems diagnosed in sample
Wagner 2014 [113] Guided Self Change High risk behaviour related to alcohol and violence