ArticleAmerican journal of community psychology2015
Comparing the Functioning of Youth and Adult Partnerships for Health Promotion.
Article in American journal of community psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cluster Randomized Trial of Teens Against Tobacco Use: Youth Empowerment for Tobacco Control in El Paso, Texas.American journal of preventive medicine · 2019Trial
- Beyond the Individual: A Scoping Review of Group and Community Dimensions of Youth Empowerment.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Examining the creation of synergy in community coalitions for smoke-free environments in Armenia and Georgia.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Article
- Initial conditions and functioning over time among community coalitions.Evaluation and program planning · 2022Article
- Health Behaviors of Student Community Research Partners When Designing and Implementing a Healthy Lifestyle Intervention on College Campuses.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- What makes intersectoral partnerships for health promotion work? A review of the international literature.Health promotion international · 2018Review
- Effects of Sectoral Diversity on Community Coalition Processes and Outcomes.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Youth partnerships are a promising but understudied strategy for prevention and health promotion. Specifically, little is known about how the functioning of youth partnerships differs from that of adult partnerships. Accordingly, this study compared the functioning of youth partnerships with that of adult partnerships. Several aspects of partnership functioning, including leadership, task focus, cohesion, participation costs and benefits, and community support, were examined. Standardized partnership functioning surveys were administered to participants in three smoke-free youth coalitions (n = 44; 45 % female; 43 % non-Hispanic white; mean age = 13) and in 53 Communities That Care adult coalitions (n = 673; 69 % female; 88 % non-Hispanic white; mean age = 49). Multilevel regression analyses showed that most aspects of partnership functioning did not differ significantly between youth and adult partnerships. These findings are encouraging given the success of the adult partnerships in reducing community-level rates of substance use and delinquency. Although youth partnership functioning appears to be strong enough to support effective prevention strategies, youth partnerships faced substantially more participation difficulties than adult partnerships. Strategies that youth partnerships can use to manage these challenges, such as creative scheduling and increasing opportunities for youth to help others directly, are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.