Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39951237›Full record

SynthesisPrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2025

What Do We Know About the Stop Now and Plan Program? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of an Early Invention for Children and Youth with Conduct Problems.

Stephanie G Craig, Katelyn Frankiewicz, Natalie R Stearns, Julie Girard-Lapointe, Allana Cortese, Natasha Vogel, Debra J Pepler

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Introduction to the Special Issue: Prevention Science and Youth Conduct Problems: Development, Prevention, and Treatment.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025
    Article
  3. The Multiple Avenues of Contribution of Robert McMahon to Prevention Science.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Stephanie G CraigDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, 3004 MCKN Extension, 50 Stone Rd E, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada. stephanie.g.craig@uoguelph.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-5951-8424
Katelyn FrankiewiczDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, 3004 MCKN Extension, 50 Stone Rd E, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Natalie R StearnsDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, 3004 MCKN Extension, 50 Stone Rd E, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Julie Girard-LapointeYork University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Allana CorteseDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, 3004 MCKN Extension, 50 Stone Rd E, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Natasha VogelDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, 3004 MCKN Extension, 50 Stone Rd E, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Debra J PeplerYork University, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Children who engage in aggressive behaviors are at heightened risk of being involved in the justice system, committing serious offenses, and becoming chronic offenders. The Stop Now And Plan (SNAP) program was designed as an early intervention to address several mechanisms underlying the development of conduct problems, including emotion regulation, prosocial behaviors, and parent-child relationships. The purpose of this study was to systematically review and synthesize current research on the SNAP program and conduct a meta-analysis. Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed and PyscINFO were searched, and the developers of SNAP were contacted to ensure no articles were missed. Twenty-two peer-reviewed articles were ultimately included following a two-stage screening process. The meta-analysis revealed a moderate effect size change (SMD =  - 0.54, 95% CI [- .42, - .65], p < .001) in externalizing problems from pre- to post-SNAP Group. The narrative review found evidence for decreases in symptoms (e.g., conduct problems, aggression, delinquency, internalizing problems) across SNAP programming. There was also preliminary evidence for changes in proposed mechanisms across the groups (e.g., emotion regulation, parent behaviors, child-parent relationship). Two randomized controlled trials (RCT) supported the efficacy of the SNAP Boys Group over another active treatment. One waitlist control found similar results for the SNAP Girls Group. There is growing evidence for SNAP, attributable to the effective clinical research partnerships established by the developers. More rigorous methods and RCTs will help solidify SNAP as a top evidence-based intervention.

Indexed as

Conduct DisorderAdolescentAggressionChildFemaleHumansMaleParent-Child RelationsAggressionChildrenInterventionStop Now and Plan

Identifiers

PMID39951237

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.