The Impact of Items and Anchors on Parent–Child Reports of Problem Behavior

Research has repeatedly demonstrated that parent and child reports of child behavior and emotional functioning often do not agree in terms of symptom severity or even symptom presence. Given the potential clinical impact that discrepant reports may have on the therapeutic process, a significant amount of research has addressed the factors influencing this observed discrepancy. Traditionally, this research has evaluated the impact of demographic factors on mean differences and obtained correlation coefficients between parent and child reports. The current research improves upon previous research in this area in two ways. First, the current research uses parent and child measures with identical rather than similar items as is commonly found in previous research. Second, the current research moves beyond identifying demographic influences on discrepant reports by explaining observed discrepancies in terms of differences in parent and child perceptions of typical child behavior.David Carlston and Benjamin Ogles are affiliated with Department of Psychology, Ohio University, Athens, USA.Funding for this project was provided by the Ohio Department of Mental Health.     

Statistics for weighing benefits and harms in a proposed genetic substudy of a randomized cancer prevention trial

Summary.  When evaluating potential interventions for cancer prevention, it is necessary to compare benefits and harms. With new study designs, new statistical approaches may be needed to facilitate this comparison. A case in point arose in a proposed genetic substudy of a randomized trial of tamoxifen versus placebo in asymptomatic women who were at high risk for breast cancer. Although the randomized trial showed that tamoxifen substantially reduced the risk of breast cancer, the harms from tamoxifen were serious and some were life threaten-ing. In hopes of finding a subset of women with inherited risk genes who derive greater bene-fits from tamoxifen, we proposed a nested case–control study to test some trial subjects for various genes and new statistical methods to extrapolate benefits and harms to the general population. An important design question is whether or not the study should target common low penetrance genes. Our calculations show that useful results are only likely with rare high penetrance genes.     

Banks winners in tournaments are difficult to recognize

Given a tournament T, a Banks winner of T is the top vertex of any maximal (with respect to inclusion) transitive subtournament of T. In this technical note, we show that the problem of deciding whether some fixed vertex v is a Banks winner for T is NP-complete. Received: 22 February 2002/Accepted: 20 June 2002 Supported by the START program Y43-MAT of the Austrian Ministry of Science. I would like to thank two thank the referees for a careful reading of the paper, for helpful remarks, and for many suggestions how to improve the presentation.     

Causal inference with generalized structural mean models

Summary.  We estimate cause–effect relationships in empirical research where exposures are not completely controlled, as in observational studies or with patient non-compliance and self-selected treatment switches in randomized clinical trials. Additive and multiplicative structural mean models have proved useful for this but suffer from the classical limitations of linear and log-linear models when accommodating binary data. We propose the generalized structural mean model to overcome these limitations. This is a semiparametric two-stage model which extends the structural mean model to handle non-linear average exposure effects. The first-stage structural model describes the causal effect of received exposure by contrasting the means of observed and potential exposure-free outcomes in exposed subsets of the population. For identification of the structural parameters, a second stage 'nuisance' model is introduced. This takes the form of a classical association model for expected outcomes given observed exposure. Under the model, we derive estimating equations which yield consistent, asymptotically normal and efficient estimators of the structural effects. We examine their robustness to model misspecification and construct robust estimators in the absence of any exposure effect. The double-logistic structural mean model is developed in more detail to estimate the effect of observed exposure on the success of treatment in a randomized controlled blood pressure reduction trial with self-selected non-compliance.     

How Welfare Policies Affect Adolescents' School Outcomes: A Synthesis of Evidence From Experimental Studies

Using data from 8 random assignment studies and employing meta‐analytic techniques, this article provides systematic evidence that welfare and work policies targeted at low‐income parents have small adverse effects on some school outcomes among adolescents ages 12 to 18 years at follow‐up. These adverse effects were observed mostly for school performance outcomes and occurred in programs that required mothers to work or participate in employment‐related activities and those that encouraged mothers to work voluntarily. The most pronounced negative effects on school outcomes occurred for the group of adolescents who had a younger sibling, possibly because of the increased home and sibling care responsibilities they assumed as their mothers increased their employment.     

Family Cap and Nonmarital Fertility: The Racial Conditioning of Policy Effects

Using an experimental design, this research examines the effect of the nation's first family cap on the births, abortions, and contraception use of over 8,000 women receiving public assistance in New Jersey. The family cap denies additional cash benefits to children conceived while the mother is receiving public assistance. Our research shows that a targeted welfare benefit manipulation does influence fertility behavior; however, the effect is conditioned by race. We find that Black women in the experimental group have a 21% lower birth rate and a 32% higher abortion rate than Black women in the control group. We do not find a birth effect for Hispanic or White women. We discuss the policy implications of the effects of a segmented family cap.