Dedobbeleer 2001.
Methods |
Study design: controlled before‐after Sampling frame: St‐Croix School District in St‐Laurent City, Montreal, Quebec Sampling method: schools matched by urban, public, French‐speaking, and multi‐ethnic Description of the community coalition: A coalition of 15 partners, including public health organizations, community organizations (e.g. YMCA, St‐Laurent Youth Resources), schools, police, St‐Laurent City, parents, and youth representatives developed the project Coalition for Youth Quality of Life Project in St‐Laurent City, an industrial area on the west side of the Island of Montreal, Quebec, Canada, which has a large, multi‐ethnic immigrant population from Asia, North African, and Middle East. Training on intersectorial collaboration, youth development, and substance abuse was provided by professionals in partner organizations |
|
Participants |
Communities: St‐Laurent City, an industrial area on the west side of the Island of Montreal, Quebec Country: Canada Ages included in assessment: 791 students in 6th grade and 8th grade cohorts Reasons provided for selection of intervention community: higher‐risk, multi‐ethnic population of recent immigrants Intervention community (population size): St‐Laurent City (67,000) Comparison community (population size): same |
|
Interventions |
Name of intervention: Coalition for Youth Quality of Life Project Theory: Ecologic Participatory Framework, PROCEED Aim: to reduce alcohol and other drug use Description of costs and resources: Professionals from partner organization trained coalition members. Information on youth development, drug resistance, self esteem, and parent‐child communication was provided in a school setting Components of the intervention: skills development, parent education, competence enhancement, and youth mobilization Start date: coalition formed in 1990. Intervention in 1992 to 1993, 1993 to 1994 Duration: 2 school years (18 months) |
|
Outcomes |
Outcomes and measures (follow‐up months): Follow at 30 months:
Date (year) of pre and post measurements Pre‐test 1992 Post‐test 1995 |
|
Notes | Only 40% follow‐up at 30 months | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | High risk | Not randomized |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | No allocation concealment |
Baseline outcome measurement similar | High risk | Frequency of alcohol consumption and amount of alcohol consumed differed at baseline |
Baseline characteristics similar | High risk | Significant difference in age of 6th grade cohort at baseline |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not blinded |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Only 40% follow‐up at 30‐month measurement |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Participants and personnel not blinded |
Protection against contamination | High risk | Intervention and control student cohorts in the same school district |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Alcohol use and amount of alcohol consumed were primary outcomes. Drug use was of low prevalence at baseline and was not reported at follow‐up |