Fast Track Intervention Effects and Mechanisms of Action Through Established Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early preventive interventions can improve outcomes in childhood, but the most effective interventions can continue to deliver benefits through the life course. The Fast Track intervention, a randomized controlled trial for children at risk of conduct problems, has lowered psychopathology, substance use problems, and criminality and elevated happiness at age 25. However, research has not studied whether the intervention's effects continue further into established adulthood. In addition, little is known about the mechanisms through which the intervention may affect adult outcomes. We attempted to answer both questions by simultaneously estimating the intervention's direct effect on adult outcomes at age 31 and the intervention's indirect effects on those outcomes via interpersonal, intrapersonal, and academic competencies gained through the intervention. Participants included the Fast Track intervention (n = 445; 72.4% male) and high-risk control samples (n = 446; 66.4% male). Direct and total effects of random assignment to Fast Track on age 31 outcomes were not significant. However, our analyses showed that Fast Track's improvements to interpersonal and intrapersonal skills in childhood served as catalysts for better life outcomes at age 31. Higher interpersonal skills led to fewer externalizing, internalizing, and substance use problems, reduced criminality and sexual partners, in addition to increased general health and full-time employment. Improved intrapersonal skills led to greater strength. There were no significant indirect pathways via academic skills. Our findings inform understanding of how a childhood preventive intervention can improve adjustment and behaviors into established adulthood.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".