Prevention science
Prevention science is the application of a scientific methodology that seeks to prevent or moderate major human dysfunctions before they occur. Regardless of the type of issue on hand, the factors that lead to the problem must be identified and addressed. Prevention research is thus focused primarily on the systematic study of these potential precursors of dysfunction, also known as risk factors; as well as components or circumstances that reduces the probability of problem development in the presence of risk, also known as protective factors. Preventive interventions aim to counteract risk factors and reinforce protective factors in order to disrupt processes or situations that give rise to human or social dysfunction.
Components of prevention scienceMrazek, P. B., Haggerty, R. J., Institute of Medicine (U.S.)., & United States. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
EpidemiologyThe prevalence, distribution, and determinants of the problem in time and space. Epidemiological investigations can be carried out through surveillance and descriptive studies to determine its extent.
Etiology
The causes of such positive or negative outcomes, with an emphasis on risk and protective factors. Also known as the Theory of Causation.
Efficacy trials
Scientific experiments that test the preventive intervention programs ability to prevent the problem under favorable conditions. Under these optimal conditions, the researcher has control over the intervention and how it is delivered. If the test finds significant desirable effects, the intervention program is considered to be efficacious.
Effectiveness trials
Scientific experiments that test the preventive intervention programs ability to prevent the problem under real world conditions. The setting and the kinds of people in the experiment should be very similar to the actual targeted population in a particular location.
Dissemination research
Analyzes how tested and effective prevention intervention programs may be spread to reduce problems at a larger scale.
Usefulness of risk factors
The term "risk factor" was first coined Dr. William B. Kannel in a 1961 article in Annals of Internal Medicine. Dr. Kannel was the epidemiologist who discovered most of the major risk factors for cardiovascular disease while working on the Framingham Heart Study in Massachusetts.There are 2 useful ways to utilize risk factors in prevention science:
- To identify subpopulations more likely to develop problems which should be reached by preventive intervention.
- To identify malleable individual or environmental characteristics that can be changed by preventive intervention.
Further observations about risk and protective factors
- Different forms of dysfunction are typically related to many different risk factors, rather than a single risk factor. On the other hand, a single risk factor may lead to a variety of consequences in different settings.
- Risk factors have compounding effects on an individual. The risk of dysfunction seems to increase exponentially with each additional exposure to a new risk factor.
- Some risk factors may predict dysfunction only at specific periods of development, while others stay constant throughout one's lifespan. As a general rule, prediction is best made from proximal risk factors.
- Diverse disorders may share common fundamental risk factors. For example, marital discord has been found to precede both conduct problems in children and depression among women.
Levels of prevention
Tier | Definition |
Universal prevention | Strategies that involves the full population based on evidence that it is likely to provide some benefit to all. It aims to prevent or delay the abuse of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. All individuals, without screening, are provided with information and skills needed to prevent the problem. Also include environmental strategies such as policies that change the availability and/or price of such problematic substances. |
Selective prevention | Strategies that involve targeted subpopulations whose risk of developing problems such as alcohol abuse or dependence is already at an elevated level above average. Targeted groups may be identified by exposure to specific risk factors such as poor family management, family history, or impulsive behaviors. An example of selective prevention is parenting programs for children with early conduct problems. |
Indicated prevention | Strategies that involve a screening process, and aim to identify individuals who exhibit early signs of early conduct problems and/or having an increased risk for a disorder, but currently do not have a diagnosable disorder. Identifiers may include falling grades among students, known problem consumption or conduct disorders, alienation from parents, school, and positive peer groups etc. |
Selective and indicated prevention strategies might involve more intensive interventions and thus involve greater cost to the participants, since their risk and thus potential benefit from participation would be greater.
Guidelines for prevention
The following guidelines for prevention science was established by an undergraduate social welfare class titled "Advances in Prevention Science: Bridging the Gap from Science to Service" at the University of Washington in Seattle during the winter quarter of 2012. It was taught by Dr. J. David Hawkins, one of the developers for the Social Development Model.Foundation guidelines
- Start prevention early before a problem arises.
- Prevention interventions should include and reach those at high risk for the problem.
- Address malleable risk factors for the problem to be prevented.
- Strengthen malleable protective factors against the problem.
- Base prevention program in a clear and believable theory of change.
- Ensure adequate financing for full implementation by utilizing cost-benefit analyses.
Intervention guidelines
- Specify clear goals with specific and measurable objectives.
- Build a community of support for the intervention.
- Choose interveners who are trusted, respected people whom recipients will listen to and develop a relationship with.
- Provide a standard protocol or manual for intervention activities that is easily available.
- Allow flexible implementation of protocol to meet needs of the program.
- Provide proper and adequate training for the interveners on the program protocols.
- Provide referrals to other services if needed by participants.
- Make services available and accessible to clients in their local community.
- Ensure intervention is culturally competent for the target population.
- Specify the duration of the intervention and provide sufficient amount to achieve a positive behavior change.
- Document all activities occurring during the program in order to monitor fidelity.
Convincing evidence guidelines
- The preventive intervention has been tested in a randomized controlled trial; or with an interrupted time series design with enough data points before and after intervention to allow threats to internal validity of results to be ruled out; or with a quasi-experimental design with a comparison group in which the researchers have ruled out plausible threats to internal validity.
- The population in which the preventive intervention was tested was properly described.
- The trial found outcomes that were statistically significant improvements for the intervention group compared to the control group.
- The trial experienced little or no differential attrition from intervention versus control condition.
- Longitudinal follow up of participants and controls found sustained effects.
- The intervention was found to be most effective with those at highest risk of the problem.
- Results have been replicated in two or more trials.
- Trial may or may not be conducted by an independent evaluator.
Effects on adolescent health
Samples of their recommended programs are:
- The Nurse Family Partnership program, which provides regular home visits with nurses to poor, first-time mothers. The program led to 43 percent fewer subsequent pregnancies and decreased the mothers' welfare use, smoking and arrests. As the children grew up, they drank less alcohol, were less likely to be arrested and had fewer sex partners than children whose mothers were not in the program.
- The Gatehouse Project, including a curriculum focused on building social, problem-solving and coping skills in schoolchildren and more positive classroom and school-wide environments, led to decreased smoking and other substance use and delayed the onset of sexual intercourse in adolescents.
- In low-income countries, the Conditional cash transfer programs, paid school fees and gave about $10 a month to mothers to ensure their children attend school. As a result, more girls stayed in school and adolescent pregnancies declined.
Case study: nurse family partnership
Evidence of effectiveness
Three randomized controlled trials were conducted with 3 diverse populations in Elmira, New York ; in Memphis, Tennessee ; and in Denver, Colorado. These research studies provide evidence on the positive and effective outcomes of NFP. Follow-up research still continues today, which studies the long-term outcomes for both mothers and children in these trials.Study 1: Elmira, NY
300 women in a semi-rural community, who had agreed to be part of the study were randomly assigned to either a group that will participate in the Nurse-Family Partnership, or a control group that was only provided developmental screening and referral to treatment for their child. Approximately 90% of the women were caucasian; 60% were from low-income families; 60% unmarried. Average age of the women in the study was 19.Effects on child
Versus the control group:- 48% fewer officially verified incidents of child abuse and neglect as of age 15.
- 43% less likely to have been arrested, and 58% less likely to have been convicted, as of age 19.
- 57% fewer lifetime arrests and 66% fewer lifetime convictions, as of age 19.
- No significant effect on recent substance use.
- No significant effect on high school graduation rates.
- No significant effect on likelihood of becoming pregnant or giving birth, or causing a pregnancy or birth.
- No significant effect on percent engaged in economically productive activities at age 19, or on lifetime use of welfare or other public assistance, per self-reports.
Effects on mother
- 20% less time spent on welfare. This effect was statistically significant at the.10 level, but not the.05 level.
- 19% fewer subsequent births.
- 61% fewer self-reported arrests.
- 72% fewer self-reported convictions.
- There were no significant effects on months employed, months on food stamps or Medicaid, or behavior-impairing substance abuse.
Study quality
Study 2: Memphis, TN
743 women who had agreed to participate in the study were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that would be given the opportunity to participate in the Nurse Family Partnership, or a control group that was only provided free transportation to scheduled prenatal medical appointments, and developmental screening, as well as referrals to treatment for their child under the age of 2 years old. 92% of the women were African-American; 85% came from households with income on or under the poverty line; 98% were unmarried; average age was 18.Effects on child at age 2
Versus the control group:- 23% fewer health care encounters for injuries or ingestions.
- 78% fewer days hospitalized for injuries or ingestions.
Effects on child at age 12
- 67% less likely to have smoked cigarettes, consumed alcohol, or used marijuana in the past month.
- 28% less likely to have an internalizing disorder, such as depression or anxiety.
- Scored 6 percentile points higher on the Tennessee state reading and math achievement tests in grades 1-6.
- Had 8% higher reading and math GPA in grades 1-6.
Effects on mother when child reached age 12
- 9% reduction in time on welfare during the 12 years of having their first child.
- 9% reduction in time on food stamps during the 12 years of having their first child.
- 10% reduction in annual government spending per person on welfare, food stamps, and Medicaid during the 12 years of having their first child.
- 16% reduction in subsequent births during the first 6 years of their first child's life.
Study quality
Study 3: Denver, CO
490 women who had agreed to participate in the program was randomly assigned to either a treatment group that would be given the opportunity to participate in the Nurse Family Partnership, or a control group that was only provided developmental screening and referrals to treatment for their child under the age of 2 years old. 46% were Mexican-American; 36% were caucasian; 15% African American; 84% were unmarried; average age was 20.Effects on child at age 4
Versus the control group, the subsample of children whose mothers had low psychological resources prior to participating in the program made sizable gains in researcher assed language development; behavioral adaptation ; executive functioning ;Effects on mother when child reached age 4
Versus the control group:- 20% longer interval between the women's 1st and 2nd births.
- Lower percentage of women experienced domestic violence from their partner in the past 6 months.
Discussion of study quality
- This was a large study with a moderately long-term follow-up of age 4 for the first-born child.
- Low attrition rate as the data on the outcomes were obtained for 82-86% of the original sample, and follow-up rates were similar for both treatment and control groups.
- The study measured outcomes for all mothers and children that were originally assigned to the nurse-visited treatment group regardless of how long they participated in the program.
- The children's mental development and language skills were measured through assessments whose reliability and validity are well-established, such as the Preschool Language Scales-3.
- The research staff administering these assessments and outcomes were blind to the group assignments.
Advancement in prevention science
National Prevention Science Coalition
was formed in 2013 as a 501 non-profit organization to promote the application of validated, science-based findings to wide-scale, effective implementation of prevention practices and policies. In doing so, they address several areas of concern, such as mental and behavioral health, education, and environmental influences. Additionally, they address adverse social conditions that contribute to both behavioral problems and major chronic illnesses that originate in childhood and become compounded in adulthood. Given that behavioral, mental and physical health problems are highly concentrated in high poverty neighborhoods, the NPSC has prioritized the reduction of poverty and its ill effects. Criminal and juvenile justice issues are also a matter of concern to them. Effective prevention of these multiple problems requires fostering environments from the prenatal period onward that nurture child and adolescent successful development.The NPSC, directed by Dr. Diana Fishbein and Dr. John Roman, is composed of scientists, educators, practitioners and clinicians, policy makers, foundation representatives, and affiliated organizations, housed at the Pennsylvania State University. They work in a nonpartisan manner with Congressional offices and Caucuses and collaborate with like-minded groups and federal agency administrators in a mutual advisory capacity. They invite individuals and organizations to join in this effort. There is no cost to membership; involvement at any level is welcomed. To register, click here: http://www.npscoalition.org/register