Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23417670›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2014

Self-generated identification codes in longitudinal prevention research with adolescents: a pilot study of matched and unmatched subjects.

Alfgeir Logi Kristjansson, Inga Dora Sigfusdottir, Jon Sigfusson, John P Allegrante

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Camaraderie: Profession-Specific Facilitated Small Groups to Improve Well-Being in Health Care.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Using Security Questions to Link Participants in Longitudinal Data Collection.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alfgeir Logi KristjanssonDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, West Virginia University, School of Public Health, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA. alkristjansson@hsc.wvu.edu.
Inga Dora SigfusdottirIcelandic Centre for Social Research and Analysis, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Jon SigfussonIcelandic Centre for Social Research and Analysis, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland.
John P AllegranteDepartment of Health & Behavior Studies, Teachers College, Columbia University, Columbia, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Self-generated identification codes (SGICs) are an increasingly utilized methodological feature of longitudinal prevention research among adolescents. This study sought to test the differences between the matched and unmatched groups at baseline on a number of background, health, and well-being and risk behavior measures in a prevention study among 13- to 16-year-old Icelandic adolescents where a SGIC was constructed and used to link individual-level respondent data over two data collection points one year apart. We use pilot data from two Reykjavik city secondary schools collected as part of the population study Youth in Iceland in February 2010 and 2011 (N = 366, SGIC matching rate 61%). Baseline results for the matched and unmatched participants are compared. Findings indicate that the unmatched subjects are both more likely to be substance users than their matched counterparts as well as being more likely to be boys and/or from disrupted families. Five out of the seven scaled measures for risk and protective factors and personality indicators reveal no difference between the matched and unmatched subjects and the significantly different measures reveal small effect sizes between the two groups. However, the effect sizes for substance use are significantly different between the matched and unmatched groups for all seven substance use measures with effect sizes from 0.52 to 1.32. These findings therefore indicate that the measurement validity of adolescent risk behaviors such as substance use may be put in jeopardy when using SGIC and that unmatched subjects may be more likely to distrust the SGIC process.

Indexed as

Risk Reduction BehaviorSelf ConceptAdolescentAdolescent BehaviorAttitude to HealthCommunity ParticipationFemaleHumansIcelandLongitudinal StudiesMalePilot ProjectsSelf ReportSubstance-Related DisordersViolence

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.