Using a developmental,
social-ecological approach to understand the etiology of health risk behavior
and inform primary prevention efforts, we assess the predictive effects of
family and neighborhood social processes on youth physical fighting and weapon
carrying. Specifically, we focus on relationships among youth and their
parents, family communication, and parental monitoring, as well as sense of community
and neighborhood informal social control, support, concerns, and disorder.
This
study advances knowledge through its investigation of family and neighborhood
structural factors and social processes together, employment of longitudinal
models that estimate effects over adolescent development, and use of
self-report and observational measures. Data from 1,093 youth/parent pairs were
analyzed from the Youth Assets Study using a Generalized Estimating Equation
(GEE) approach; family and neighborhood assets and risks were analyzed as
time-varying and lagged. Similar family assets affected physical fighting and
weapon carrying, whereas different neighborhood social processes influenced the
two forms of youth violence.
Study findings have implications for the primary
prevention of youth violence, including the use of family-based approaches that
build relationships and parental monitoring skills, and community-level change
approaches that promote informal social control and reduce neighborhood
concerns about safety.
Predictive Effects of Parenting Practices, Family Processes, Neighborhood Social Processes, and Neighborhood Conditions on Physical Fighting
| Initial Models1 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Adjusted1 | |
| OR (95% CI) | p | |
| Broken windows score | 1.02 (0.97, 1.06) | 0.5266 |
| Family communication | 0.77 (0.65, 0.90) | 0.0012 |
| Relationship with mother | 0.71 (0.58, 0.87) | 0.0012 |
| Relationship with father | 0.67 (0.56, 0.80) | <.0001 |
| Parental monitoring | 0.55 (0.44, 0.68) | <.0001 |
| Informal social control | 0.80 (0.71, 0.92) | 0.0010 |
| Sense of community | 0.87 (0.74, 1.01) | 0.0683 |
| Neighborhood support | ||
| Two parent household | 1.04 (0.87, 1..25) | 0.6665 |
| One parent household | 0.65 (0.49, 0.85) | 0.0017 |
| Inconsistent | 1.08 (0.81, 1.45) | 0.6028 |
| Neighborhood concerns – crime/safety | 1.08 (0.98, 1.20) | 0.1257 |
| Neighborhood concerns – services | 1.09 (0.99, 1.20) | 0.0876 |
| Final Model2 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Adjusted2 | |
| OR (95% CI) | P | |
| Relationship with father | 0.68 (0.57, 0.83) | <.0001 |
| Parental monitoring | 0.58 (0.46, 0.72) | <.0001 |
| Informal social control | 0.83 (0.72, 0.96) | 0.0142 |
| Neighborhood support | ||
| Two parent household | 1.10 (0.91, 1.34) | 0.3304 |
| One parent household | 0.73 (0.54, 1.00) | 0.0484 |
| Inconsistent | 1.17 (0.85, 1.60) | 0.3385 |
1Ten separate initial models were analyzed (one for each variable of interest). Each was adjusted for the potential confounders youth age, gender, race/ethnicity, family structure, ever below the federal poverty level, parental education, neighborhood structural disadvantage, and neighborhood residential instability. ORs for the potential confounding variables are not shown.
2One final model was analyzed that adjusted for the potential confounders above and also adjusted for other variables of interest in the final model. Only variables of interest with a p-value ≤ .05 were retained in the final model. ORs for the potential confounding variables are not shown.
Full article at: http://goo.gl/qp2U9U
Tamara M. Haegerich,
Contact: Tamara M. Haegerich, PhD, Division of Unintentional
Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway MS F-62, Atlanta, GA
30341, Phone: 404-488-1308, Fax: 404-488-1317, Email: vog.cdc@hciregeaHT
More at: https://twitter.com/hiv
insight
No comments:
Post a Comment