Effects of Network Approval on Accounts of Commitment Trajectories in Intraracial and Interracial Relationships

The current study used dyadic data to investigate the impact of relationship type and social support on the retrospective accounts of commitment trajectories of romantic relationships. Past research suggests that social support is a positive contributor to relationship stability and commitment, which may be especially true for partners in interracial relationships who face broader societal opposition than intraracial couples. Using multilevel modeling, we investigated the effects of sex, relationship type, and social support on reports of commitment. Results showed differences in trajectories of commitment based on couple type (interracial vs. intraracial) for both men and women. Social support was found to have an especially strong impact for women in interracial relationships compared with women in intraracial relationships, but there was no differential impact among men.     

Interactive Hazards Education Program for Youth in a Low SES Community: A Quasi‐Experimental Pilot Study

A pilot study of an interactive hazards education program was carried out in Canberra (Australia), with direct input from youth participants. Effects were evaluated in relation to youths’ interest in disasters, motivation to prepare, risk awareness, knowledge indicators, perceived preparedness levels, planning and practice for emergencies, and fear and anxiety indicators. Parents also provided ratings, including of actual home‐based preparedness activities. Using a single group pretest‐posttest with benchmarking design, a sample of 20 youths and their parents from a low SES community participated. Findings indicated beneficial changes on a number of indicators. Preparedness indicators increased significantly from pre‐ to posttest on both youth (p < 0.01) and parent ratings (p < 0.01). Parent ratings reflected an increase of just under six home‐based preparedness activities. Youth knowledge about disaster mitigation also was seen to increase significantly (p < 0.001), increasing 39% from pretest levels. While personalized risk perceptions significantly increased (p < 0.01), anxiety and worry levels were seen either not to change (generalized anxiety, p > 0.05) or to reduce between pre‐ and posttest (hazards‐specific fears, worry, and distress, ps ranged from p < 0.05 to < 0.001). In terms of predictors of preparedness, a number of variables were found to predict posttest preparedness levels, including information searching done by participants between education sessions. These pilot findings are the first to reflect quasi‐experimental outcomes for a youth hazards education program carried out in a setting other than a school that focused on a sample of youth from a low SES community.     

Development of predictive signatures for treatment selection in precision medicine with survival outcomes

For survival endpoints in subgroup selection, a score conversion model is often used to convert the set of biomarkers for each patient into a univariate score and using the median of the univariate scores to divide the patients into biomarker‐positive and biomarker‐negative subgroups. However, this may lead to bias in patient subgroup identification regarding the 2 issues: (1) treatment is equally effective for all patients and/or there is no subgroup difference; (2) the median value of the univariate scores as a cutoff may be inappropriate if the sizes of the 2 subgroups are differ substantially. We utilize a univariate composite score method to convert the set of patient's candidate biomarkers to a univariate response score. We propose applying the likelihood ratio test (LRT) to assess homogeneity of the sampled patients to address the first issue. In the context of identification of the subgroup of responders in adaptive design to demonstrate improvement of treatment efficacy (adaptive power), we suggest that subgroup selection is carried out if the LRT is significant. For the second issue, we utilize a likelihood‐based change‐point algorithm to find an optimal cutoff. Our simulation study shows that type I error generally is controlled, while the overall adaptive power to detect treatment effects sacrifices approximately 4.5% for the simulation designs considered by performing the LRT; furthermore, the change‐point algorithm outperforms the median cutoff considerably when the subgroup sizes differ substantially.     

Response‐adaptive designs for binary responses: How to offer patient benefit while being robust to time trends?

Response‐adaptive randomisation (RAR) can considerably improve the chances of a successful treatment outcome for patients in a clinical trial by skewing the allocation probability towards better performing treatments as data accumulates. There is considerable interest in using RAR designs in drug development for rare diseases, where traditional designs are not either feasible or ethically questionable. In this paper, we discuss and address a major criticism levelled at RAR: namely, type I error inflation due to an unknown time trend over the course of the trial. The most common cause of this phenomenon is changes in the characteristics of recruited patients—referred to as patient drift. This is a realistic concern for clinical trials in rare diseases due to their lengthly accrual rate. We compute the type I error inflation as a function of the time trend magnitude to determine in which contexts the problem is most exacerbated. We then assess the ability of different correction methods to preserve type I error in these contexts and their performance in terms of other operating characteristics, including patient benefit and power. We make recommendations as to which correction methods are most suitable in the rare disease context for several RAR rules, differentiating between the 2‐armed and the multi‐armed case. We further propose a RAR design for multi‐armed clinical trials, which is computationally efficient and robust to several time trends considered.     

Coercive controlling behaviors in intimate partner violence in male same-sex relationships:A mixed-methods study

Using mixed methods, we explored the role of coercive controlling behaviors in a high-risk sample of 126 men in violent same-sex relationships. Contrary to a prediction that separate factors of physical violence and coercive control might emerge, a simple principle components analysis supported that male same-sex relationship intimate partner violence (IPV) is essentially unidimensional. Qualitative narratives supported a single latent factor solution of violence, and that coercive controlling behaviors better detect IPV dynamics within the same violent encounters (i.e., weapon use), even when compared to profiles defined by physical violence. Narratives also highlighted gender-different tactics of coercion used, underscoring importance of context-based assessments.     

Testing the Effectiveness of Fundraiser Job Titles in Charitable Bequest and Complex Gift Planning

Traditional fundraiser job titles are often institution centered, focusing on the benefits of fundraising as “institutional advancement” or “institutional development.” Such institution‐centered job titles may not be as effective with donors given the modern shift toward donor‐centered philanthropy. Alternative job titles can be gift centered (for example, “major gifts”) or donor centered (for example, “donor advising”). A survey of 3,188 respondents tested sixty‐three job titles in four charitable scenarios: a charitable bequest gift, a gift of stock, a gift of real estate, and a charitable gift annuity. Measured by which person donors would be more likely to contact to discuss each donation, the worst‐performing titles were the traditional institution‐focused fundraiser job titles, in particular those using “advancement,” “institutional advancement,” or “development.” This was also true when examining only respondents who had made large gifts ($500+) to a charity. Traditional institution‐focused job titles are both the most commonly used and the worst performing. Nonprofit managers may do well to consider the donor's perspective when selecting job titles for fundraisers rather than following traditional industry practices.