Table Of ContentAdvances in Prevention Science
Zili Sloboda
Hanno Petras Editors
Defi ning
Prevention
Science
Advances in Prevention Science
For furthervolumes:
http://www.springer.com/series/8822
.
Zili Sloboda (cid:129) Hanno Petras
Editors
Defining Prevention Science
Editors
ZiliSloboda HannoPetras
Ontario,Ohio JBSInternational,Inc.
USA Rockville,Maryland
USA
ISBN978-1-4899-7423-5 ISBN978-1-4899-7424-2(eBook)
DOI10.1007/978-1-4899-7424-2
SpringerNewYorkHeidelbergDordrechtLondon
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2014931239
©SpringerScience+BusinessMediaNewYork2014
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation,broadcasting,reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherphysicalway,andtransmissionor
informationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilar
methodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.Exemptedfromthislegalreservationarebriefexcerpts
inconnectionwithreviewsorscholarlyanalysisormaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurposeofbeing
enteredandexecutedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.Duplication
ofthispublicationorpartsthereofispermittedonlyundertheprovisionsoftheCopyrightLawofthe
Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from
Springer.PermissionsforusemaybeobtainedthroughRightsLinkattheCopyrightClearanceCenter.
ViolationsareliabletoprosecutionundertherespectiveCopyrightLaw.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexempt
fromtherelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of
publication,neithertheauthorsnortheeditorsnorthepublishercanacceptanylegalresponsibilityfor
anyerrorsoromissionsthatmaybemade.Thepublishermakesnowarranty,expressorimplied,with
respecttothematerialcontainedherein.
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Prevention Science: A Global Issue
Therearefewcountriesorpopulationswhicharenotaffectedbytheconsequences
ofbehaviouralrisk(Ezzatietal.,2002).Obesity,forexample,wasonceconsidered
primarilyaproblemofhigh-incomecountries,butitsconsequencesarenowlinked
tomoredeathsworldwidethanalackoffood(WHO,2004).Despiteyoungpeople
traditionallybeingperceivedasmorehealthythanoldermembersofthepopulation,
a large proportion of premature adult deaths (up to 70 %) are associated with
behaviours initiated in adolescence (Resnick, Catalano, Sawyer, Viner, & Patton,
2012), and young people’s involvement in preventable risks such as drug and
alcohol use or engagement in unsafe sex are now important contributors to the
globalburdenofdisease(Goreetal.,2011).Theconsequencesofthesebehaviours
in both adults and young people are also expensive. Although it is difficult to
estimate the costs placed on health and social services as a result of preventable
disease, good population health is considered a prerequisite of current economic
growthstrategies(e.g.Health2020inEurope).Thisglobalpriorityisalsoechoedin
theWorldHealthOrganisation’sActionPlanforGlobalStrategyforthePrevention
and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases (2008–2013) (WHO, 2008), which
outlinesactivitiestopreventandcontrolthefourmainnon-communicablediseases;
cardiovasculardisease,diabetes,cancersandchronicrespiratorydiseases.Tohelp
achieve this, the Action Plan recommends developing and promoting prevention
interventionsthataredesignedtoreducesharedriskfactors(tobaccouse,unhealthy
diets,physicalinactivityandharmfuluseofalcohol)(WHO,2008).Underpinning
thispriorityistherecognitionthatsuccessisdependentuponinternationalcollab-
oration and shared learning; indeed the current economic climate means that
sharing knowledge and resources is the only viable forward for many countries.
However,evenoperatingwithin aninternationalframework,thechallengeforthe
preventionfieldistodevelopanddisseminateevidence-basedpoliciesthatnotonly
ensureequalityofaccesstointerventionsbutarealsosensitivetolocalmoderators
(Resnicketal.,2012).
Great advances have been made in recent years, in diverse fields ranging from
molecularbiologytobehaviouralepidemiology,thathaveallowedfortheidentifica-
tion of important psychobiological, developmental and environmental mediators of
v
vi PreventionScience:AGlobalIssue
riskbehaviour(Catalanoetal.,2012).Manyofthesearecommonacrosscultures,but
equally,manyarenot(e.g.Beyers,Toumbourou,Catalano,Arthur,&Hawkins,2004).
Indeed, the influence of socioeconomic status and social inequalities on health and
well-being,forexample,candifferevenwithinsmallgeographies(MarmotReview,
2010).Thismeansthatglobalpreventionsuccessdependsnotonlyuponrobusttheory
anddemonstrationofprogrammeefficacybutalsoupon considerationoftheimple-
mentation, transferability and adaptation of programmes across diverse delivery
systems and policy objectives (Brotherhood & Sumnall, 2011). Interventions that
have demonstrated effectiveness in their country of development (most commonly
theUSA)arenoteasilytranslated,andnotableexamplesexistofbeneficialprogramme
effects that are not sustained when transferred internationally (Fraser et al., 2011;
Malti, Ribeaud, & Eisner, 2011), especially whenassessed by independentresearch
teams (Eisner, 2009). This not only suggests a need for theory-driven adaptation
processes(Ferrer-Wreder,Sundell,&Mansoory,2012)butalsohighlightstheimpor-
tanceofindependentinternationalreplicationofinterventioneffects.
Similarly, moving away from intervention theory towards implementation, we
must also consider the diverse range of sociocultural environments into which
preventionislikelytobedelivered(Li,Mattes,McMurray,Hertzmanm,&Stanley,
2009).Interventions,particularlythosetargetedtowardsyoungpeoplemaybemost
effective whendelivered inaccordancewith (or are atleast sensitive to) prevailing
socialtrendsandattitudes(Room,2012).However,becauseoftheirdiversity,these
may often be in opposition to both international policies and conventions (e.g. UN
Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs), and the priorities of health and social care
professionals (e.g. prevention of cannabis use). These differences can be seen
reflected in international epidemiological data on preventable behaviours
(e.g. Hibbell et al., 2012), public preferences towards regulation of risk (Gallup
Organisation, 2011), political, social and cultural norms on acceptability of risky
(Nutt, 2009), and cross-national differences in policy regulating access to risky
behaviours(e.g.Joosen&Raw,2006).Forexample,thereisasixfolddifferencein
per capita consumption of pure alcohol between the lowest and highest consuming
countries(WHO,2011),andglobaldifferencesinalcoholpolicymanifestinanarray
ofmarketingregulations(e.g.sportssponsorshipbans),interventionistpricingpoli-
cies(e.g.minimumalcoholunitpricing),culturalnorms(e.g.legalalcoholpurchase
age),andtheacceptabilityofindustrylobbying(suchasindustryself-regulationand
“responsibilitydeals”)(Baboretal.,2003).Subsequently,whatmightbeconsidered
an acceptable prevention strategy in one country (e.g. “dry” University campuses)
mayberejectedbyanother.Similarly,preventionsuccessasdefinedinonecountry
(e.g.alcoholabstentionasthegoalofprevention)mightnotbeacceptableinanother
(e.g.whereanalcoholharmreductionapproachispreferred).
Itisintosuchcomplexmixesofbehaviouralmoderatorsthatwetrytointroduce
preventionwork,andsoitisunsurprisingthatourfindingsareoftennottransferable.
Aspreventionresearcherswecanhavefaithintherobustnessofourtheories,andcan
modifyourinterventionsinrelationtospecificandconsistentpopulationcharacter-
istics.However,weoftenassumepopulationswelcomeintervention,butrecipientsof
preventionaredynamicsocialactorswhofacemultiplecompetingandincreasingly
PreventionScience:AGlobalIssue vii
global influences on their behaviour (Labonte, Mohindra, & Schrecker,2011). The
introductionoftobaccocontrolpolicy,forexample,hasbeenarelativepublichealth
success in the developed world, but it has also shown us that as one market is
restricted,othersareexploited(Otan˜ez,Mamudu,&Glantz,2009).Mostprevention
researchersareunabletoinfluencesuchmacrodeterminantsofhealthandwell-being,
but as challenged by the World Health Organisation, it is through international
collaboration that we might begin to address the major global health and social
challengesweface.Thisisofcourseeasiertowritethanenact,andsuccessfulaction
willneedthecooperationofmanystakeholders,fromthegeneralpublictointerna-
tional organisations. By taking a global perspective on prevention, particularly
through our activities in international fora, we might more readily achieve this.
This first volume in the Advances in Prevention Science Book Series is also to be
welcomed as it will help to create a solid foundation for international prevention
scienceactivities.Itprovidesauniversalpreventionlexicon,andoutlinesevidence-
based theories and methods that will support a unified approach to preventing and
managingengagementinunhealthyandriskybehavioursacrossthelifespan.
HarrySumnall
CentreforPublicHealth
LiverpoolJohnMooresUniversity
Liverpool,UK
EU-SocietyforPreventionResearch
Warsaw,Poland
References
Babor,T.F.,Caetano,R.,Casswell,S.,Edwards,G.,Giesbrecht,N.,Graham,K.,etal.(2003).
Alcohol: No ordinary commodity—Research and public policy. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Beyers,J.M.,Toumbourou,J.W.,Catalano,R.F.,Arthur,M.W.,&Hawkins,J.D.(2004).A
cross-national comparison of risk and protective factors for adolescent substance use: The
UnitedStatesandAustralia.JournalofAdolescentHealth,35,3–16.
Brotherhood,A.,&Sumnall,H.R.(2011).Europeandrugpreventionqualitystandards.Lisbon:
EMCDDA.
Catalano, R. F., Fagan, A. A., Gavin, L. E., Greenberg, M. T., Irwin, C. E., Ross, D. A.,
etal.(2012).Worldwideapplicationofpreventionscienceinadolescenthealth.Lancet,379,
1653–1664.
Eisner,M.(2009).Noeffectsinindependentpreventiontrials:Canwerejectthecynicalview?
JournalofExperimentalCriminology,5,163–183.
Ezzati, M., Lopez, A. D., Rodgers, A., Vander Hoorn, S., Murray, C. J., & Comparative Risk
AssessmentCollaboratingGroup.(2002).Selectedmajorriskfactorsandglobalandregional
burdenofdisease.Lancet,360,1347–1360.
viii PreventionScience:AGlobalIssue
Ferrer-Wreder, L., Sundell, K., & Mansoory, S. (2012). Tinkering with perfection: Theory
development in the intervention cultural adaptation field. Child & Youth Care Forum, 41,
149–171.
Fraser,M.W.,Guo,S.,Ellis,A.R.,Thompson,A.M.,Wike,T.L.,&Li,J.(2011).Outcome
studies of social, behavioral, and educational interventions emerging issues and challenges.
ResearchonSocialWorkPractice,21,619–635.
GallupOrganisation.(2011).FlashEurobarometer330:Youthattitudesondrugs.Onlinepubli-
cation.RetrievedonJune25,2012,fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_330_en.
pdf
Gore, F.M.,Bloem, P.J. N.,Patton, G.C.,Ferguson, J.,Joseph,V., Coffey,C.,etal. (2011).
Globalburdenofdiseaseinyoungpeopleaged10–24years:Asystematicanalysis.Lancet,
377,2093–2102.
Hibbell, B., Guttormsson, U., Ahlstro¨m, S., Balakireva, O., Bjarnason, T., Kokkevi, A.,
et al. (2012). The 2011 ESPAD report - Substance use among students in 36 European
countries.Stockholm:CAN.
Joosen,L.,&Raw,M.(2006).Thetobaccocontrolscale:Anewscaletomeasurecountryactivity.
TobaccoControl,15,247–253.
Labonte,R.,Mohindra,K.,&Schrecker,T.(2011).Thegrowingimpactofglobalizationforhealth
andpublichealthpractice.AnnualReviewofPublicHealth,32,263–283.
Li,J.,Mattes,E.,McMurray,A.,Hertzmanm,C.,&Stanley,F.(2009).Socialdeterminantsof
childhealthandwellbeing.HealthSociologyReview,18,3–11.
Malti,T.,Ribeaud,D.,&Eisner,M.(2011).Theeffectsoftwouniversalpreventiveinterventions
toreducechildren’sexternalizingbehavior:Aclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial.Journalof
ClinicalChildandAdolescentPsychology,40,677–692.
Marmot Review. (2010). Fair society, healthy lives: Strategic review of health inequalities in
EnglandPost2010.London:MarmotReview.
Nutt,D.J.(2009).Equasy–Anoverlookedaddictionwithimplicationsforthecurrentdebateon
drugharms.JournalofPsychopharmacology,23,3–5.
Otan˜ez,M.G.,Mamudu,H.M.,&Glantz,S.A.(2009).Tobaccocompanies’useofdeveloping
countries’economicrelianceontobaccotolobbyagainstglobaltobaccocontrol:Thecaseof
Malawi.AmericanJournalofPublicHealth,99,1759–1771.
Resnick,M.D.,Catalano,R.F.,Sawyer,S.M.,Viner,R.,&Patton,G.C.(2012).Seizingthe
opportunityofadolescenthealth.Lancet,379,1564–1567.
Room, R. (2012). Preventing youthful substance use and harm. Between effectiveness and
politicalwishfulness.SubstanceUseandMisuse,47,936–943.
WorldHealthOrganisation(WHO).(2004).Globalstrategyondiet,physicalactivity,andhealth.
Geneva:WorldHealthOrganisation.
WorldHealthOrganisation(WHO).(2008).2008–2013Actionplanfortheglobalstrategyforthe
preventionandcontrolofnoncommunicablediseases.Geneva:WorldHealthOrganisation.
World Health Organisation (WHO). (2011). Global status report on alcohol and health 2011.
Geneva:WorldHealthOrganisation.
The Promise of Prevention Science
PreventionScienceisarelativelynewfield,withsomeofthefirstpapersoutliningthe
conceptualframework,methodsandresearchprioritieshavingbeenpublishedinthe
early 1990s (e.g., Coie et al., 1993; Kellam & Van Horn, 1997). These early
descriptionshighlightedthebreadthofpreventionscience,whichdrawsfrommulti-
ple disciplines and encompasses a broad range of research including studies of
epidemiology, studies designed to identify risk and protective factors of a problem
ordisorderandthedevelopmentofinterventionsforpreventingoramelioratinghigh-
risk behaviours, disease, disorder or injury. In addition, prevention science also
includesresearchonthetranslationanddisseminationofeffectivepreventiveinter-
ventionsintopractice;studiestounderstandthescienceofbringingefficaciousand
effectiveinterventionstoscaleinordertohavepublichealthimpact.
Significantprogressinpreventionhasbeenmadeoverthelast30years.Epidemi-
ological and etiological research has identified numerous biological, psychological,
social and environmental risk and protective factors that influence behaviour and
positivewell-beingaswellasdisordersandillness.Thisresearchhascontributedto
thedevelopmentofprogramsandpoliciesthathavedemonstratedefficacytoprevent
behaviouralandhealthproblemsandpromotewell-beingbytargetingtheseempiri-
callyidentifiedriskandprotectivefactors,representinggreatpotentialforenhancing
public health and well-being. When carefully implemented, such interventions can
preventawiderangeofhealthproblems,promotepositivedevelopmentandachieve
economic benefits (CDC, 2007; National Prevention Strategy, 2011). Considerable
evaluation data indicate that these types of interventions have had significant and
far-reachingeffectsinreducingunhealthyeating;physicalinactivity;alcohol,tobacco
andotherdrugabuse;teenpregnancy;schoolfailure;delinquentbehaviour;violence;
andothermental,emotional,behaviouralandphysicalhealthproblems.Furthermore,
these interventions have shown a cost-beneficial economic impact on education,
criminaljustice,socialandhealthservices(O’Connell,Boat,&Warner,2009).
Based on these data and on recognition of this potential, a number of current
federal initiatives have been put in place to support scale-up of evidence-based
programs(e.g.,home-visitation,teenpregnancy,socialinnovationfund).Severalof
theseeffortsincludeatieredapproachtofunding,withgreaterfundingavailablefor
ix
