Substance Use Disorders
Conditions
Keywords
Substance Use Disorders, Adolescents, Treatment, Mediation
Brief summary
The ultimate goal of this research is to facilitate rapid enhancement of youth substance abuse treatments by determining the key mechanisms of change (i.e., what to target more intensely to generate better outcomes). This work is critical because current outpatient adolescent substance abuse treatments yield only small to medium effects that diminish once treatment has ended. The proposed modern mediation study will address this serious public health problem by experimentally evaluating the most critical factors causing change in client outcomes during adolescent substance abuse treatment, directing the field to focus treatment efforts on those factors.
Detailed description
Adolescents with substance use disorders (SUD) are at high risk for significant deleterious outcomes. Although several evidence-based practices for adolescent SUD exist, they yield only small to medium effects that rapidly diminish (30-70% 6-month relapse rates). A promising approach for determining how to enhance treatment is experimental mediation research. In contrast to traditional correlational mediation approaches, experimental mediation permits causal inference and is comprised of key steps: (A) Identify the putative mediating variable for a treatment. (B) Enhance the treatment to target that mediator more intensely. (C) Randomize youth to conditions, with the standard and enhanced versions of the treatment targeting different levels of the same mediator. (D) Measure the mediator and outcomes longitudinally. (E) Perform modern mediation analyses, coupled with analyses evaluating causal inference, to determine if changes in the mediator are responsible for changes in outcomes. This experimental test of mediation, focused on causality, facilitates rapid improvement of treatments by specifying change mechanisms to target in order to improve outcomes. These steps will be followed to elucidate the mediating processes in treatment for adolescent SUD, with the ultimate goal of enhancing the strength and durability of SUD treatments. The three most common putative mediating variables in adolescent SUD treatments are parent management, behavioral regulation, and peer relations. For this study, parent management was chosen as the target because it has evidenced the most potential for yielding generalizable change in youth outcomes and also has been shown to indirectly improve youths' behavioral regulation and peer relations. Of existing treatments for adolescent SUD, family-based Contingency Management (CM) was chosen as the treatment to enhance because it is highly amenable to an augmented focus on parenting, is less complex relative to other SUD treatments, and has amassed considerable support in terms of efficacy and dissemination potential. Thus, following experimental mediation steps, youth with SUD will be randomized to receive either standard CM or enhanced CM (i.e., CM+) that targets parenting more intensely. Repeated assessments for 12 months and longitudinal analyses will allow testing of mediating processes. The investigators will examine whether parent management skills mediate the effect of treatment on youth substance use and behavior problems (Aim 1). In addition, the investigators will determine whether parent management skills mediate the effect of treatment on youth behavioral regulation and deviant peer relations (Aim 2). Finally, the investigators will test whether behavioral regulation and deviant peer relations mediate the effect of parent management on youth substance use and behavior problems (Aim 3). Findings could have broad impact across multiple adolescent SUD treatments.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALStandard Contingency Management (CM)
CM utilizes behavior modification & cognitive behavioral strategies to target adolescent substance use. Protocol components are as follows: (a) The provider introduces CM to the youth and caregiver and engages them in the intervention; (b) The provider conducts Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence (ABC) assessments of the youth's AOD use with the youth and caregiver; (c) Based on the results of the ABC assessments, self-management planning and drug refusal skills training are implemented by the provider in collaboration with the youth and caregiver; (d) Concurrently, a point and level system contract is established with the family, which provides the youth with rewards/privileges for negative drug and alcohol tests and disincentives (e.g., extra chores) for positive tests. Until continued abstinence is achieved, components b through d are repeated; (e) The provider collaborates with the family to develop plans for sustaining long-term abstinence. Typical duration of CM is 12-16 weeks.
BEHAVIORALEnhanced Contingency Management (CM+)
The CM+ protocol adds the behavioral assessment and teaching system from Parent Management Training Oregon (PMTO) to standard CM to enhance parent's skill acquisition more intensely. PMTO's behavioral assessment and teaching system uses three processes to bring about changes in parenting: daily parent reports on youth behavior, anti-coercive problem-solving, and structured learning and in vivo practice of new parenting techniques.
Sponsors
Oregon Social Learning Center
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
12 Years to 18 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age 12 to 18 years * Presence of current substance use disorder * Availability of a parent/guardian willing to participate
Exclusion criteria
* Actively psychotic, suicidal, or homicidal * Pervasive developmental disorder or metal retardation
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Any positive urine screens for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), synthetic THC, amphetamines, opiates, phencyclidine (PCP), cocaine, and/or alcohol metabolites (ethyl glucuronide, ethyl sulfate). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Youth Receipt of Required Contingency Management (CM) Treatment Components. | Course of treatment (length varied by participant) | All treatment sessions were audio-recorded. A random selection of tapes was coded by trained raters to indicate the presence or absence of CM treatment components. Scores on this outcome reflect the proportion of components delivered, with higher scores indicating the presence of more treatment components. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' discipline activity and the variability in rule enforcement and consequences. Scores range from 6-30. High scores suggest unpredictable enforcement of rules, which can undermine authority and increase behavioral issues. This is measured through parents' self-reports of their own behaviors. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures positive parenting through the frequency of praise and reinforcement. Scores range from 6-30. High scores reflect the frequent use of praise and rewards, which are associated with better child compliance and emotional well-being. This is measured through parents' self-reports of their own behaviors. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Parent management practices as measured by the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) (parent-report). A 10-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' monitoring and supervision of their child's activities and whereabouts. Scores range from 10-50. Higher scores indicate less parental awareness of the child's activities. Elevated scores are associated with an increased risk of delinquency and externalizing behaviors. This is measured through parents' self-reports of their own behaviors. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' discipline activity and the variability in rule enforcement and consequences. Scores range from 6 -30. High scores suggest unpredictable enforcement of rules, which can undermine authority and increase behavioral issues. This is measured through youths' reports on parents' behaviors. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures positive parenting through the frequency of praise and reinforcement. Scores range from 6-30. High scores reflect the frequent use of praise and rewards, which are associated with better child compliance and emotional well-being. This is measured through youths' report on parents' behaviors. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | A 10-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' monitoring and supervision of their child's activities and whereabouts. Scores range from 10-50. Higher scores indicate less parental awareness of the child's activities. Elevated scores are associated with an increased risk of delinquency and externalizing behaviors. This is measured through youths' reports on parents' behaviors. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Frequency of substance use as measured by the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (youth-report). The Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Frequency Subscale measures the frequency of substance use of 16 different substances over the past 30 days. Scores range from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate higher frequency of use. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | The Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Substance Problems Subscale measures the presence of each DSM-V criterion for a substance use disorder and lower severity symptoms. Scores range from 0 to 16, where higher scores indicate the presence of more criterion/symptoms. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (youth report) scales. Youth report of youth risk-taking as assessed by the sum score on the Drive subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (drive). |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (youth report) scales. Youth report of youth risk taking as assessed by the sum score on the Fun Seeking subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (fun seeking). |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Youth problem behaviors as measured by the Child Behavior Checklist (parent-report) and the Youth Self Report. This is a 35-item Subscale of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) measuring externalizing behaviors from the youth's self-report. It assesses outward-directed behaviors such as aggression, defiance, hyperactivity, and rule-breaking. Scores range from 0 to 70, where higher scores indicate the presence of more externalizing behavior problems. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (parent report) scales. Parent report of youth risk-taking as assessed by the sum score on the Drive subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (drive). |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (parent report) scales. Parent report of youth risk taking as assessed by the sum score on the Fun Seeking subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (fun seeking). |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (parent report) scales. Parent report of youth risk-taking as assessed by the sum score on the Reward Responsiveness subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 5 to 20. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (reward responsiveness). |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Youth performance on computerized Balloon Analogue Risk Task (automatic version) that requires participants to enter the number of times that they want to pump to inflate a computer-generated balloon, with participants earning a point for each pump but losing all of the points if the balloon pops before the selected number of pumps. The mean number of pumps on all trials is reported. Scores range from 0 to 126. Higher scores equal higher youth risk taking behavior. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - inhibitory control as measured by the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire-Revised (youth- and parent-report) and the Go/No Go Task. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Parent report of youth inhibitory control as assessed by the mean score on the Effortful Control factor from the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire. Scores on individual items and factor range from 1=Very false to 5=Very true. Higher scores equal higher youth effortful control. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Youth performance of youth inhibitory control as assessed by the percent correct on no go trials on computerized go/no-go task. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Peer relations (association with peers who engage in delinquent behaviors & prosocial activities) as measured by the Peer Relations Questionnaire (youth- and parent-report). |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | The Positive Peer Activity Scale of the Pittsburgh Youth Study Interview comprises 10 questions rated on a 4-point scale (0 = none to 4 = all) concerning the proportion of friends of the subject that have engaged in a variety of prosocial activities over the past 30 days. Scores range from 0 to 40, where higher scores indicate a higher proportion of prosocial friends. This is measured from the youth's self-report. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | The Positive Peer Activity Scale of the Pittsburgh Youth Study Interview comprises 10 questions rated on a 4-point scale (0 = none to 4 = all) concerning the proportion of friends of the subject that have engaged in a variety of prosocial activities over the past 30 days. Scores range from 0 to 40, where higher scores indicate a higher proportion of prosocial friends. This is measured from the parent's report on youth's friends. |
| Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline to 12 months | Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (youth report) scales. Youth report of youth risk taking as assessed by the sum score on the Reward Responsiveness subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 5 to 20. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (reward responsiveness). |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
Study participants include adolescents aged 12-18 years with substance use disorders. All 129 adolescents enrolled in the study met the inclusion criteria and were randomized to treatment. Only adolescents were considered enrolled in the study.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) This group will receive standard CM for adolescent substance abuse.
Standard Contingency Management (CM): CM utilizes behavior modification & cognitive behavioral strategies to target adolescent substance use. Protocol components are as follows: (a) The provider introduces CM to the youth and caregiver and engages them in the intervention; (b) The provider conducts Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence (ABC) assessments of the youth's AOD use with the youth and caregiver; (c) Based on the results of the ABC assessments, self-management planning and drug refusal skills training are implemented by the provider in collaboration with the youth and caregiver; (d) Concurrently, a point and level system contract is established with the family, which provides the youth with rewards/privileges for negative drug and alcohol tests and disincentives (e.g., extra chores) for positive tests. Until continued abstinence is achieved, components b through d are repeated; (e) The provider collaborates with the family to develop plans for sustaining long-term abstinence. Typical duration of CM is 12-16 weeks. | 66 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) This group will receive an enhanced CM protocol for adolescent substance abuse that targets parenting more intensely.
Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+): The CM+ protocol adds the behavioral assessment and teaching system from Parent Management Training Oregon (PMTO) to standard CM to enhance parent's skill acquisition more intensely. PMTO's behavioral assessment and teaching system uses three processes to bring about changes in parenting: daily parent reports on youth behavior, anti-coercive problem-solving, and structured learning and in vivo practice of new parenting techniques. | 63 |
| Total | 129 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Participant did not initiate treatment | 5 | 8 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Total | Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 14.76 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.49 | 14.87 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.43 | 14.98 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.36 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Corporal Punishment - Parent | 1.95 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.34 | 2.03 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.29 | 2.11 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.25 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Corporal Punishment - Youth | 5.11 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.84 | 5.26 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.7 | 5.43 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.54 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Inconsistent Discipline- Parent | 10.09 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.6 | 10.35 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.32 | 10.62 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.03 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Inconsistent Discipline- Youth | 14.8 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.07 | 14.71 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.77 | 14.6 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.48 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Involvement - Parent | 24.85 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.89 | 25.15 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5 | 25.46 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.13 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Involvement - Youth | 30.53 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.38 | 30.66 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.98 | 30.79 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.58 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Poor Monitoring - Parent | 14.35 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.26 | 14.61 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.35 | 14.89 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.48 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Poor Monitoring - Youth | 25.15 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.42 | 24.9 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.38 | 24.63 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.38 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Positive Parenting - Parent | 18.09 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.28 | 17.64 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.5 | 17.16 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.69 |
| Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) Positive Parenting - Youth | 19.82 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.89 | 19.7 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.69 | 19.57 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.51 |
| Any Positive Urine Drug Screen | 0.68 proportion of participants | 0.71 proportion of participants | 0.73 proportion of participants |
| Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART) Number of Pumps | 48.49 pumps STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.17 | 50.05 pumps STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.79 | 51.72 pumps STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.33 |
| Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) Drive - Parent | 11.91 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.05 | 11.68 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.34 | 11.44 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.6 |
| Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) Drive - Youth | 11.3 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.41 | 11.25 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.36 | 11.19 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.31 |
| Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) Fun Seeking - Parent | 12 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.72 | 11.92 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.83 | 11.84 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.95 |
| Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) Fun Seeking - Youth | 11.86 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.8 | 12.16 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.88 | 12.46 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.92 |
| Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) Reward Responsiveness - Parent | 15.47 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.19 | 15.26 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.28 | 15.03 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.36 |
| Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activation Systems (BIS-BAS) Reward Responsiveness - Youth | 15.35 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.43 | 15.38 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.37 | 15.41 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.32 |
| Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) - Externalizing Parent Report | 31.95 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.18 | 30.04 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.65 | 28.03 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.91 |
| Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) - Externalizing Youth Report | 22.88 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.19 | 23.72 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.63 | 24.6 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.09 |
| Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire (EATQ) Effortful Control Factor - Parent | 2.4 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.6 | 2.42 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.57 | 2.44 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.54 |
| Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire (EATQ) Effortful Control Factor - Youth | 2.96 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.63 | 2.88 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.59 | 2.8 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.53 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 8 Participants | 24 Participants | 16 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 57 Participants | 104 Participants | 47 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Substance Dependence | 3.15 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.33 | 3.21 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.4 | 3.27 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.49 |
| Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Substance Frequency | 22.89 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.37 | 22.4 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.3 | 21.9 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.42 |
| Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Substance Problem | 6.73 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.33 | 6.95 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.52 | 7.19 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.73 |
| Go-No-Go Percent Correct | 0.74 percent correct STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 | 0.74 percent correct STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 | 0.74 percent correct STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 |
| Peer Delinquency | 15.42 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.75 | 15.13 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.33 | 14.83 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.74 |
| Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report | 9.8 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.29 | 10.15 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.93 | 10.51 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.56 |
| Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report | 16.62 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.92 | 15.91 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.33 | 15.16 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.94 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 3 Participants | 5 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 1 Participants | 3 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 1 Participants | 5 Participants | 4 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 2 Participants | 4 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 58 Participants | 110 Participants | 52 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 66 participants | 129 participants | 63 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 24 Participants | 50 Participants | 26 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 42 Participants | 79 Participants | 37 Participants |
| Total Positive Urine Drug Screen | 0.82 count of positive screens STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.72 | 0.83 count of positive screens STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.69 | 0.84 count of positive screens STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.65 |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 3 / 66 | 0 / 63 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 7 / 66 | 5 / 63 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 7 / 66 | 7 / 63 |
Outcome results
Primary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Any positive urine screens for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), synthetic THC, amphetamines, opiates, phencyclidine (PCP), cocaine, and/or alcohol metabolites (ethyl glucuronide, ethyl sulfate).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline timepoint | 0.68 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.47 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 0.60 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.49 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 0.51 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.51 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 0.50 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.51 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 0.53 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.51 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 0.44 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.5 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 0.37 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.49 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline timepoint | 0.73 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.45 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 0.54 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.51 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 0.55 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.5 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 0.45 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.51 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores, Any Positive Youth Urine Drug/Alcohol Screens (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 0.41 positive test per timepoint | Standard Error 0.5 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.49Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' discipline activity and the variability in rule enforcement and consequences. Scores range from 6-30. High scores suggest unpredictable enforcement of rules, which can undermine authority and increase behavioral issues. This is measured through parents' self-reports of their own behaviors.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 10.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.6 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 9.63 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.08 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 9.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.93 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 9.55 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.52 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 8.07 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.52 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 9.48 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.27 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 7.56 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.91 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 10.62 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.03 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 7.93 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.67 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 9.27 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.59 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 7.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.83 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale - Parent Report(Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 9.11 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.37 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.09Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' discipline activity and the variability in rule enforcement and consequences. Scores range from 6 -30. High scores suggest unpredictable enforcement of rules, which can undermine authority and increase behavioral issues. This is measured through youths' reports on parents' behaviors.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 14.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.07 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 14.37 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.56 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 13.58 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.92 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 13.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.75 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 12.74 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.24 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 13.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.59 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 13.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.87 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 14.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.48 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 12.65 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.12 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 13.63 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.28 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 12.69 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.49 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Inconsistent Discipline Subscale (Youth Report) (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 13.56 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.47 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.06Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Parent management practices as measured by the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) (parent-report). A 10-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' monitoring and supervision of their child's activities and whereabouts. Scores range from 10-50. Higher scores indicate less parental awareness of the child's activities. Elevated scores are associated with an increased risk of delinquency and externalizing behaviors. This is measured through parents' self-reports of their own behaviors.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 14.29 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.96 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 13.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.44 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 11.83 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.01 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 14.35 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.26 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 13.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.07 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 13.59 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.69 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 12.69 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.92 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 14.89 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.48 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 14.73 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.28 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 14.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.39 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 12.03 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.27 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 13.02 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.02 |
Comparison: APQ - Poor Monitoring - Parent Report Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.88Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
A 10-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures parents' monitoring and supervision of their child's activities and whereabouts. Scores range from 10-50. Higher scores indicate less parental awareness of the child's activities. Elevated scores are associated with an increased risk of delinquency and externalizing behaviors. This is measured through youths' reports on parents' behaviors.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 25.15 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.42 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 23.04 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.43 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 21.98 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.27 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 21.34 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.81 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 21.38 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.76 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 22.46 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.5 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 23.28 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.3 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 24.63 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.38 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 21.15 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.25 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 21.59 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.87 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 22.46 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.02 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Poor Monitoring Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 22.69 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.04 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.03Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures positive parenting through the frequency of praise and reinforcement. Scores range from 6-30. High scores reflect the frequent use of praise and rewards, which are associated with better child compliance and emotional well-being. This is measured through parents' self-reports of their own behaviors.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 18.09 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.28 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 18.45 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.85 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 18.27 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.72 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 17.66 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.02 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 18.22 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.99 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 18.55 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.27 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 18.15 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.52 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 17.48 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.17 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 18.05 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.22 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 17.16 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.69 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 18.14 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.27 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 17.06 Scores on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.62 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.95Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
A 6-item subscale of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) that measures positive parenting through the frequency of praise and reinforcement. Scores range from 6-30. High scores reflect the frequent use of praise and rewards, which are associated with better child compliance and emotional well-being. This is measured through youths' report on parents' behaviors.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 19.82 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.89 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 18.93 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.32 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 19.85 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.09 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 19.83 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.48 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 19.26 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.68 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 19.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.39 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 20.13 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.45 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 19.57 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.51 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 19.79 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.08 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 19.59 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.36 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 19.69 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.28 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Parent Management - Positive Parenting Subscale - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 19.41 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.63 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.5Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Peer relations (association with peers who engage in delinquent behaviors & prosocial activities) as measured by the Peer Relations Questionnaire (youth- and parent-report).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 9.89 score on a scale | Standard Error 9.44 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 15.42 score on a scale | Standard Error 13.75 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 8.06 score on a scale | Standard Error 7.59 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 9.38 score on a scale | Standard Error 9.8 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 9.45 score on a scale | Standard Error 12.56 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 8.8 score on a scale | Standard Error 8.29 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 7.43 score on a scale | Standard Error 8.71 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 14.83 score on a scale | Standard Error 10.74 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 10.06 score on a scale | Standard Error 10.97 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 11.41 score on a scale | Standard Error 14.28 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 8.88 score on a scale | Standard Error 10.38 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Peer Delinquency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 9.91 score on a scale | Standard Error 11.75 |
Comparison: Peer Delinquencyp-value: 0.23Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
The Positive Peer Activity Scale of the Pittsburgh Youth Study Interview comprises 10 questions rated on a 4-point scale (0 = none to 4 = all) concerning the proportion of friends of the subject that have engaged in a variety of prosocial activities over the past 30 days. Scores range from 0 to 40, where higher scores indicate a higher proportion of prosocial friends. This is measured from the parent's report on youth's friends.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 9.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.29 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 10.41 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.22 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 11.14 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.04 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 10.88 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.65 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 11.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.4 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 12.18 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.15 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 13.90 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.85 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 10.51 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.56 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 12.24 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.02 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 11.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.19 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 14.39 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.4 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 11.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.4 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.31Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
The Positive Peer Activity Scale of the Pittsburgh Youth Study Interview comprises 10 questions rated on a 4-point scale (0 = none to 4 = all) concerning the proportion of friends of the subject that have engaged in a variety of prosocial activities over the past 30 days. Scores range from 0 to 40, where higher scores indicate a higher proportion of prosocial friends. This is measured from the youth's self-report.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 17.97 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.5 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 17.11 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.66 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 16.62 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.92 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 16.66 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.95 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 17.37 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.02 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 17.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.01 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 16.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.63 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 16.28 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.12 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 18.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.38 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 15.71 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.51 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 15.16 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.94 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Peer Relations - Positive Peer Activity - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 16.76 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.16 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.73Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Parent report of youth inhibitory control as assessed by the mean score on the Effortful Control factor from the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire. Scores on individual items and factor range from 1=Very false to 5=Very true. Higher scores equal higher youth effortful control.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 2.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 2.47 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.62 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 2.45 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.59 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 2.38 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.59 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 2.42 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 2.48 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.61 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 2.68 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.66 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 2.44 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.54 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 2.59 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.59 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 2.54 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.56 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 2.73 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.72 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 2.55 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.99Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - inhibitory control as measured by the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire-Revised (youth- and parent-report) and the Go/No Go Task.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 2.96 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.63 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 3.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.47 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 3.01 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.56 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 3.04 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.48 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 3.12 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.56 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 3.17 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.56 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 3.07 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.45 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 2.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.53 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 3.06 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.56 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 2.92 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.57 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 3.03 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.5 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - EATQ - Youth (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 3.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.52 |
Comparison: EATQ Effortful Control - Youth Report Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.11Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Youth performance of youth inhibitory control as assessed by the percent correct on no go trials on computerized go/no-go task.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 0.74 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.15 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 0.75 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.15 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 0.73 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.14 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 0.75 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.14 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 0.77 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.13 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 0.73 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.15 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 0.75 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.14 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 0.74 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.15 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 0.72 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.17 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 0.71 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.16 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 0.76 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.11 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Inhibitory Control - Go No Go Performance (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 0.73 percent correct | Standard Deviation 0.15 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.82Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Youth performance on computerized Balloon Analogue Risk Task (automatic version) that requires participants to enter the number of times that they want to pump to inflate a computer-generated balloon, with participants earning a point for each pump but losing all of the points if the balloon pops before the selected number of pumps. The mean number of pumps on all trials is reported. Scores range from 0 to 126. Higher scores equal higher youth risk taking behavior.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 51.29 pumps | Standard Deviation 10.3 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 48.49 pumps | Standard Deviation 12.17 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 49.88 pumps | Standard Deviation 11.85 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 48.35 pumps | Standard Deviation 10.37 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 54.02 pumps | Standard Deviation 14.9 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 49.75 pumps | Standard Deviation 13.67 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 53.90 pumps | Standard Deviation 13.13 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 53.86 pumps | Standard Deviation 11.41 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 56.29 pumps | Standard Deviation 14.46 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 51.72 pumps | Standard Deviation 13.33 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 52.09 pumps | Standard Deviation 13.92 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - BART (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 53.14 pumps | Standard Deviation 11.71 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.06Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (parent report) scales. Parent report of youth risk-taking as assessed by the sum score on the Drive subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (drive).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 11.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.05 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 11.92 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.5 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 11.93 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.87 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 12.02 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.59 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 12.05 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.26 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 12.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.91 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 11.64 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.48 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 11.44 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.6 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 11.51 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.75 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 11.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.53 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 11.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.42 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 11.48 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.77 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.3Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (youth report) scales. Youth report of youth risk-taking as assessed by the sum score on the Drive subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (drive).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 11.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.41 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 11.17 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.12 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 11.23 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.01 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 10.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.4 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 10.91 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.34 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 11.37 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.96 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 11.16 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.17 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 11.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.31 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 10.91 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.3 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 11.02 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.41 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 10.82 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.14 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Drive - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 11.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.43 |
Comparison: BISBAS Drive - Youth Report. Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.31Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (parent report) scales. Parent report of youth risk taking as assessed by the sum score on the Fun Seeking subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (fun seeking).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 12.00 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.72 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 11.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.12 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 12.16 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.01 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 12.38 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.85 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 12.45 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.12 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 11.93 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.16 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 11.64 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.78 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 11.84 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.95 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 11.49 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.15 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 11.54 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.16 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 11.64 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.76 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 11.86 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.21 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.7Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (youth report) scales. Youth report of youth risk taking as assessed by the sum score on the Fun Seeking subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System scales. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 4 to 16. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (fun seeking).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 12.04 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.03 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 11.86 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.8 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 12.03 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.02 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 11.57 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.4 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 11.97 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.28 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 12.03 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.5 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 12.34 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.54 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 12.41 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.99 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 12.46 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.92 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 12.15 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.98 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 12.53 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.94 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Fun Seeking - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 12.31 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.75 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.35Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (parent report) scales. Parent report of youth risk-taking as assessed by the sum score on the Reward Responsiveness subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 5 to 20. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (reward responsiveness).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 15.47 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.19 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 15.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.08 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 16.1 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.21 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 15.29 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.05 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 15.55 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.26 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 15.98 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.14 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Parent | 15.62 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.91 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Parent | 15.34 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.08 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Parent | 15.03 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.36 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Parent | 15.31 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.8 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Parent | 15.09 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.12 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Parent Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Parent | 15.13 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.03 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.89Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Behavioral regulation - risk taking as measured by the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (youth report) scales. Youth report of youth risk taking as assessed by the sum score on the Reward Responsiveness subscale from the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System. Scores on individual items and subscale range from 1=Strongly agree to 4=Strongly disagree and scores range from 5 to 20. Higher scores equal higher youth behavioral activation (reward responsiveness).
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 15.35 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.43 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 15.63 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.38 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 15.48 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.24 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 14.51 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.02 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 15.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.68 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 15.63 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.05 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months - Youth | 15.88 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.81 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline - Youth | 15.41 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.32 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months - Youth | 15.44 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.89 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months - Youth | 15.26 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.95 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months - Youth | 15.23 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.47 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Behavioral Regulation - Risk Taking - Reward Responsiveness - Youth Report (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months - Youth | 15.69 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.97 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.13Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Youth problem behaviors as measured by the Child Behavior Checklist (parent-report) and the Youth Self Report. This is a 35-item Subscale of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) measuring externalizing behaviors from the youth's self-report. It assesses outward-directed behaviors such as aggression, defiance, hyperactivity, and rule-breaking. Scores range from 0 to 70, where higher scores indicate the presence of more externalizing behavior problems.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 22.88 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.19 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 Months | 18.07 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.09 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 Months | 17.05 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.94 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 Months | 16.26 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.97 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 Months | 16.06 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.02 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 Months | 15.82 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.89 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 Months | 13.59 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.45 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 24.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.09 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 Months | 15.06 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.79 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 Months | 19.15 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.35 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 Months | 14.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.07 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Problem Behaviors (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 Months | 16.53 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.23 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.92Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
The Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Substance Problems Subscale measures the presence of each DSM-V criterion for a substance use disorder and lower severity symptoms. Scores range from 0 to 16, where higher scores indicate the presence of more criterion/symptoms.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 6.73 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.33 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 3.91 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.94 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 3.33 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.89 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 2.51 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.17 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 3.14 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.87 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 1.95 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.79 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 1.59 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.93 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 7.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.73 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 2.88 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.73 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 3.28 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.79 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 1.43 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.36 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Problems (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 2.06 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.17 |
Comparison: Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.89Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months).
Frequency of substance use as measured by the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (youth-report). The Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN) Frequency Subscale measures the frequency of substance use of 16 different substances over the past 30 days. Scores range from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate higher frequency of use.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 22.89 score on a scale | Standard Error 17.37 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 13.05 score on a scale | Standard Error 16.09 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 12.18 score on a scale | Standard Error 16.94 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 11.89 score on a scale | Standard Error 15.11 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 12.85 score on a scale | Standard Error 15.63 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 13.83 score on a scale | Standard Error 18.76 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 9 months | 8.06 score on a scale | Standard Error 14.43 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | Baseline | 21.9 score on a scale | Standard Error 17.42 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 6 months | 11.15 score on a scale | Standard Error 12.44 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 2 months | 14.51 score on a scale | Standard Error 15.88 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 12 months | 7.51 score on a scale | Standard Error 11.88 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Changes From Baseline Scores Compared to Post-Treatment Scores for Youth Substance Use Frequency (Measured at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, & 12 Months). | 4 months | 10.48 score on a scale | Standard Error 15.04 |
Comparison: GAIN - Substance Frequency Mixed effects regression model tested for between-group differences in change over time.p-value: 0.54Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Youth Receipt of Required Contingency Management (CM) Treatment Components.
All treatment sessions were audio-recorded. A random selection of tapes was coded by trained raters to indicate the presence or absence of CM treatment components. Scores on this outcome reflect the proportion of components delivered, with higher scores indicating the presence of more treatment components.
Time frame: Course of treatment (length varied by participant)
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Youth Receipt of Required Contingency Management (CM) Treatment Components. | Cognitive Behavioral Components | 0.16 proportion of components received | Standard Error 0.01 |
| Standard Contingency Management (CM) | Youth Receipt of Required Contingency Management (CM) Treatment Components. | Behavioral Modification Components | 0.33 proportion of components received | Standard Error 0.01 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Youth Receipt of Required Contingency Management (CM) Treatment Components. | Cognitive Behavioral Components | 0.11 proportion of components received | Standard Error 0.01 |
| Enhanced Contingency Management (CM+) | Youth Receipt of Required Contingency Management (CM) Treatment Components. | Behavioral Modification Components | 0.37 proportion of components received | Standard Error 0.01 |
Comparison: Cognitive Behavioral Componentsp-value: <0.001ANOVA
Comparison: Behavioral Modification Componentsp-value: 0.08ANOVA