Suchergebnisse

Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) and related economic evaluation methods (cost analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis) have increasingly been applied to prevention and intervention programs for youth and young adults to assess their costs as well as the gains that may be anticipated from investing in these programs. This work reflects in part the growing prominence of evidence-based programs, policies, and practices as well as evidence-informed decision making. The papers included in this special issue represent a range of topics and issues, including the need for accurate and comprehensive assessment of program costs, high-quality BCAs of prevention and intervention programs, increasing recognition of the importance of monetizing noncognitive outcomes, and the role of BCA in pay for success financing arrangements. This introduction (a) describes the evidence-based context in which this work plays a role, (b) summarizes the practical and theoretical contributions of the papers, and (c) identifies the common themes.

Purpose: Few cost-effectiveness studies have been conducted on social-emotional interventions for students in preschool settings. The current study is a cost-effectiveness analysis of the First Step Next (FSN) intervention for preschool students. Method: Our approach involved a secondary analysis of a randomized control trial that utilized the ingredients method to estimate costs (Levin & McEwan, 2001). In addition, effect sizes were used to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios representing the cost of improving student outcomes by one standard deviation (1 SD). Results: FSN was more cost-effective for improving behavior in the school setting than in the home setting, with an average cost per 1 SD improvement of $3,833 and $6,329, respectively. Additionally, the intervention had greater cost-effectiveness for social skill-related outcomes than problem behavior-related outcomes among preschool students. Discussion: This study advances our understanding of the costs and outcomes of practices designed to improve the school success of our youngest learners.

Rural adolescents are at risk for firearm-related injury and death. In response, professional organizations have called for communication between adolescents, parents, and providers about firearms. A shared understanding of firearms between providers and families can facilitate effectiveness of health interventions. However, few studies engage adolescents in identifying their perception of common firearm terminology. The current study aimed to understand how adolescents in rural communities defined firearm-related terms including firearm, carrying, and handling, and differences in terms based on prior firearm training. Data were from a mixed methods community-based participatory study of 93 adolescents from rural Washington state. Thematic qualitative coding identified themes for firearm (gun, weapon, projectile, and tool), carrying (on you/your person, transportation, and holding), and handling (actively using, safe use, and holding) and differences between those with prior firearms training. Findings provide insight into perceptions of firearm-related terms for adolescents, an often-neglected voice, and inform rural policy and prevention efforts.