ArticleSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2024
Neighborhood disadvantage and adolescent behavior problems: how do inferences differ across definitions of disadvantage?
Article in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low-level arsenic exposure, childhood neighborhood disadvantage, and executive functions in adolescents from Montevideo, Uruguay.Environmental research · 2025Article
- Local Landscapes, Evolving Minds: Mechanisms of Neighbourhood Influence on Dual-State Mental Health Trajectories in Adolescence.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Racial discrimination predicts subjective cognitive decline: Perceived relationship support buffers the association.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarious definitions of neighborhood disadvantage (ND) exist, yet evidence is lacking on how ND operationalization may impact scientific inference.
methodsWe used data from wave 6 of the Fragile Families study, excluding those without census tract or behavior problem data (n = 2363). Outcomes included five scales from the caregiver-reported Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and a self-reported delinquency scale. ND was defined in four ways: (1) a modified Sampson definition which included four neighborhood poverty variables; (2) a poverty-only definition which only included percent households below poverty; (3) an overextended definition which added a mediator between the ND-behavior relationship, and (4) an expanded definition which added six additional ND variables to the modified Sampson definition. Using effect estimates from generalized linear models, differences were calculated using percent change-in-estimate, with the modified Sampson as the referent.
resultsEffect estimates were similar for the modified Sampson and expanded definitions (< 5% difference). The poverty-only definition differed from the modified Sampson unsystematically. Estimates for the overextended definition were consistently larger compared to modified Sampson (10-37% greater). The expanded and modified Sampson definitions produced similar results.
conclusionPoverty-only and overextended ND definitions should be interpreted with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38062166What 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.