Table 1:

YPAR Studies for Substance Use Prevention

Author, Year	Targeted Substance	Participant Description	N	Objectives	Participatory Approach	Methods	Youth Outcomes	Community Outcomes
Ager et al., 2008	ATOD	Inner-city, African American, ages 10–12	7	To prevent or reduce youth drug abuse through utilizing and enhancing community capacities to develop a drug prevention video	None listed	Video development	Participants improved their drug (t = −3.61, p < .05) and video (t = −3.63, p < .05) knowledge; learned research skills; engaged with community; participated in the development of drug education content tailored to their community	Drug-education content tailored to community
Berg et al., 2009	ATOD	African American, Latino, ages 14–16	114	To reduce and/or delay onset of drug and sexual risk in urban adolescents	PAR	Mixed methods	Intervention youth shifted to believing that fewer peers were using drugs (p =049); youth approval of peer drug use decreased (p = .084) and educational expectations increased (p = .091). Individual behavioral level outcomes: alcohol use and frequency of marijuana use, number of sex partners decreased over time. Majority graduated from high school.	Increase in social cohesion; increase in community level self-efficacy; increase in social action
Brazg et al., 2011	ATOD	Upper middle-income suburban community, ages 14–18	9	To engage high school youth in a community-based assessment of adolescent substance use and abuse	PAR	Photovoice	Increased dialogue between youth and adult community members about adolescent substance use; produced traveling exhibit of the data that is now owned by the community and the youth participants.	Increased dialogue between youth and adult community members about adolescent substance use; enhanced community-level data; Photovoice data that motivated community action
Diamond et al., 2009	ATOD	African American, Latino, ages 14–20	41	Strengthen protective factors and reduce risk factors for alcohol and other substance use among high school age youth by addressing multiple factors at the individual, peer, community and city level	Participatory Intervention Model	Media-based drug prevention intervention	Produced intervention “Leadership and Craft Development Training Program”; produced 5 Xperience shows, volume One Xperience CD and CD release show; recruited and trained Xperience artists who could effectively deliver drug prevention messages to their peers via song, dance and spoken word based on their own experiences, and who could model drug-free behavioral values and norms; cooperation with media	Developed youth partnerships with neighborhood-based community organizations; reached several thousands of youth with ads, information booths, website, promotional items and CDs, heard about the program from friends
Helm et al., 2015	ATOD	Native Hawaiian, ages 12–18	10	To guide the development of a Native Hawaiian model of drug prevention	PAR, Positive Youth Development	Photovoice	Youth increased perceived value of cultural values, practices, beliefs, protocols, and disciplines; youth engaged as leaders and role models in their community	Received enhanced community-level data needed to develop the foundation of an efficacious prevention program from the perspective of rural Hawaiian youth
Jardine & James, 2012	Tobacco	Native Dene, ages 14–18	10	To better understand: what youth know and understand about tobacco use; how they vie w tobacco use in their community; and what influences their decisions to start smoking or not to start smoking	PAR, Hart’s Ladder of Participation	Interviews	Produced book “Youth Voices on Tobacco”, and distributed to all students at two schools; increased leadership skills and research skills	Raised awareness of tobacco use and helped both the youth researchers and the community to consider possible steps towards changing to healthier lifestyle choices; shift in view to youth as resources
Lee et al., 2013	Tobacco	Southeast Asian, ages 15–26	15	To describe environmental aspects of tobacco use among Southeast Asian refugees in the U.S.	PAR	Survey, Photovoice	Raised youth awareness of tobacco products and tobacco use in their environment.	Received enhanced community-level data
Lee et al., 2017	Tobacco	Southeast Asian, ages 15–24	9	To engage youth in critical analysis of how tobacco us impacts their community	PAR	Photovoice, Observations	Youth connected smoking behaviors they observed at their school with low student morale and student officials’ lack of engagement regarding students’ tobacco use.	School-youth dialogue about low student morale and student officials’ lack of engagement regarding students’ tobacco use
Maglajlić & Tiffany, 2006	ATOD	ages 13–19	75	To develop a communication strategy for the prevention of HIV/AIDS in Bosnia Herzegovina; to increase the capacity of young people to become involved in developing knowledge and practices that support their well-being	PAR	Mixed methods	Prevention strategy developed: recommendation to develop a nation-wide, school-based participatory peer education program using interactive group-based interactive workshops.Cooperation with the media using talk shows, TV advertisements, billboards, music
Petteway et al., 2018	Tobacco	Minority, ages 10–14	14	To (1) elucidate how youth from a high-tobacco-burden community perceive/interact with their local tobacco environment; (2) train youth as active change agents for tobacco-related community health; and (3) improve intergenerational understandings of tobacco use/impacts within the community	CBPR	Photovoice	Youth presented their findings and what they learned through the process to community; developed Youth Tobacco Advisory Council	Instrumental in establishing a more dynamic and open communication between city agencies, council members, community residents, and members of the CEASE collaborative
Pinsker et al., 2017	Tobacco	Somali, ages 13–17	65	To develop a culturally appropriate tobacco prevention intervention targeted toward Somali youth in Minneapolis, Minnesota.	CBPR	Video development	Produced videos targeting factors found to influence youth tobacco use among East African youth including social norms, peer influence, culture/religion, misinformation and acceptability of tobacco use	Received drug-education content tailored to community; contributed to youth collaborations with ongoing community programs
Poland et al., 2002	ATOD	Street-involved, ages not specified	6	To develop and implement a harm reduction program for street involved youth using a participatory process	PAR	Focus group, interviews	Produced a 20-minute video to illustrate issues and strategies for drug-related harm reduction that was distributed to agencies in Toronto who serve street-involved youth. Increased social cohesion among participants.	Received drug-education content tailored to community
Ross, 2011	Tobacco	Minority, Ages 15–18	20	To engage youth in a community-based tobacco assessment	Positive Youth Development	GIS, Observations, Counts	Engaged with and provided tobacco prevention recommendations to community leaders, city council, local health committee, city solicitor, policy makers; worked with a senator to write a bill	Received enhanced community-level data and increased youth engagement at the policy level
Tanjasiri et al., 2011	Tobacco	Asian American and Pacific Islander, Ages 14–18	32	To empower Asian American and Pacific Islander youth to identify and understand environmental characteristics associated with tobacco use in four AAPI communities in California and Washington	CBPR	Photovoice	Presented to tobacco control advocates and city council; had opportunities to collaborate with more youth, networking, followed by skills building sessions on data dissemination (oral presentation, video, web-based formats)	Received enhanced community-level data
Wilson et al., 2008	ATOD	Elementary school students (multiple groups)	122	To identify and build youths’ capacities and strengths as a means of ultimately decreasing rates of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use and other risky behavior	CBPR, Positive Youth Development	Photovoice	Groups developed their own measures for success of this projects; increased social action at the school-level (e.g., awareness campaigns about school conditions; school behavior campaigns, cleanup projects, projects to improve school spirit).	Increased youth engagement at the school-level