A case study in developmental discontinuity: <scp>PROSPER</scp> Interventions and adolescent substance use trajectories shape young adult substance use and mental health problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The loss of John Schulenberg reverberates across the developmental and prevention sciences. In honor of his many contributions, this paper applies his ideas of developmental continuity and discontinuity to understand the process by which PROSPER delivered universal prevention programs (delivered in Grades 6 and 7) affect young adult outcomes. Guided by these developmental models, we deconstructed adolescent substance use initiation trajectories into two discrete phases-early and late adolescence, demarcated by substance use initiation levels at the end of 9th grade. We evaluated the effects of PROSPER interventions on these phases, and in turn, the effects of adolescent substance use initiation on young adult antisocial behavior, alcohol and drug use consequences, and depression symptoms. This sample included 1,984 young adults who participated in the PROSPER intervention trial in Grade 6 (two cohorts, 2002 and 2003), followed over 8 adolescent measurement occasions (Fall and Spring of Grade 6; Spring of Grades 7-12). Young adult outcomes were averaged across three waves (collected at ages 20, 23, and 25). PROSPER interventions were associated with reduced substance use initiation in early adolescence, but not escalation during late adolescence. In turn, substance use in both early and late adolescence was uniquely associated with young adult antisocial behavior, depression symptoms, and substance use consequences. PROSPER interventions were associated with young adult antisocial behavior and problematic substance use via reduced risk for early initiation status. Findings are discussed in terms of developmental continuity and discontinuity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".