Ohio State University.
New York University.
Dev Psychopathol. 2018 Oct;30(4):1529-1534. doi: 10.1017/S0954579418000810.
Recently in this journal, Weeland et al. (2018) published a thought-provoking article reporting moderating effects of children's serotonin transporter-linked polymorphisms (5-HTTLPR) on negative parenting during prevention with the Incredible Years series. Participants were parents and young children of 387 families enrolled in the Observational Randomized Control Trial of Childhood Differential Susceptibility study. An equally important finding, which we focus on in this comment, involved null effects for all tests of parenting as a mediator of prevention-induced improvements in children's externalizing behavior. Although such findings may seem surprising, both confirmations of and failures to confirm parenting change as a mediator of child behavior change are common in the prevention and intervention literatures. In this comment, we explore likely reasons for heterogeneity in findings, including both moderators of treatment effect size and methods used to test mediation. Common moderators of prevention and intervention response to Incredible Years include dose, parenting problems at intake, high-risk versus clinical nature of samples, how parenting is measured, and whether child training is included with parent training. All of these moderators affect power to detect mediation. We then discuss conceptual criteria for testing mediation in randomized clinical trials, and problems with interpreting mediating paths in cross-lag panel models. Although the gene effect reported by Weeland et al. is important, their cross-lag panel models do not provide strong tests of parenting as a mediator of child behavior change. We conclude with recommendations for testing mediation in randomized clinical trials.
最近,在本刊上,Weeland 等人(2018 年)发表了一篇发人深省的文章,报告了儿童血清素转运体相关多态性(5-HTTLPR)对 Incredible Years 系列预防过程中消极教养的调节作用。参与者为参与儿童差异易感性观察性随机对照试验的 387 个家庭中的父母和幼儿。一个同样重要的发现是,在所有检验教养作为预防引起的儿童外化行为改善的中介的测试中,均未发现中介效应。虽然这些发现可能令人惊讶,但在预防和干预文献中,作为儿童行为改变中介的教养变化的证实和未证实都是常见的。在这篇评论中,我们探讨了发现结果存在异质性的可能原因,包括治疗效果大小的调节剂和测试中介的方法。影响 Incredible Years 预防和干预反应的常见调节剂包括剂量、入组时的教养问题、样本的高风险与临床性质、教养的测量方式以及是否包括儿童训练与父母训练。所有这些调节剂都会影响检测中介的能力。然后,我们讨论了在随机临床试验中测试中介的概念标准,以及在交叉滞后面板模型中解释中介路径的问题。尽管 Weeland 等人报告的基因效应很重要,但他们的交叉滞后面板模型并没有对教养作为儿童行为改变的中介提供强有力的检验。最后,我们提出了在随机临床试验中测试中介的建议。