This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Jesse Green, PhD; Neil Wintfeld, PhD
NYU Medical Center New York, NY

JAMA. 1997;278(12):979-980.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—The randomized controlled trial by Dr Grossman and colleagues¹ of a violence prevention curriculum is mistitled; the study is neither a randomized trial nor an investigation of violence. Second, procedural flaws, data errors, and conjectural interpretations cast doubt on the curriculum's reported success.

Contrary to common usage, words like "aggression" did not signify physical attack but milder conduct like stomping one's feet or sticking out one's tongue.² In theory, such conduct may induce violence. However, the present study tracked nonviolent behavior in 8-year-olds, so phrases like "violence prevention" are speculation. The accompanying Editorial went further, praising the curriculum for "addressing intentional injuries" and potentially yielding "safer homes, safer schools, and safer communities."³

More troubling was the unfounded depiction of this research as a randomized controlled trial. In this study neither children nor schools were randomized. The pairing of schools followed by random assignment within . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?