Family RelationsCHEERNCT04362475
Community Health Through Engagement and Environmental Renewal
A study testing Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) in people with Family Relations and Blight, run by University of Alabama at Birmingham at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Community Health from Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) will leverage previous Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) community engagement projects to reach and intervene on a high need population. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 11 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Family Relations, Blight
- What is being tested?
- Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 915 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 21 May 2021to 1 Sep 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 11 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- For FYI, parents who reside in the FYI intervention neighborhood (North Titusville, South Titusville, Rising -West Princeton, and Belview Heights) and have a child age 11-16 years.
- For ESPI, residents who live in the ESPI intervention neighborhoods (North Titusville, South Titusville, Druid Hills, and Fountain Heights).
Who cannot join
- For FYI, does not met the above requirements and did not consent to participate.
- For ESPI, not residing in one of the above neighborhoods and did not consent to participate.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
UAB Center for the Study of Community Health
Birmingham, Alabama, 35233
About this study
Community Health from Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) will leverage previous Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) community engagement projects to reach and intervene on a high need population. Disadvantage and poverty have long-term and transgenerational adverse impacts on social interaction and cohesion and residents' emotional and physical health. Mothers living and raising children in these conditions face multiple stressors without the community support previous generations relied on. Decades of research on American cities have connected the social, economic, and physical characteristics of neighborhoods with a lack of social cohesion, inability to maintain shared norms of acceptable behavior,and increases in health disparities and risky behaviors. Social cohesion and collective efficacy inversely associate with depression among youth. In a parallel manner, improved parenting practices and youth behavior directly associate with neighborhood social interactions and social cohesion. While these associations are suggestive, CHEER will directly test causal hypotheses at the neighborhood and family levels in a randomized control trial, that can significantly advance the evidence base for public health interventions: Family Youth Intervention (FYI) and an Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI) to increase social interaction, social cohesion, and collective efficacy and influence wellbeing of mothers and their youth.
Read the detailed description
Aim 1 Family System: To test the effect of FYI on primary outcomes of youth psychosocial behaviors and sexual risk compared to a Wait List Control.
1a. FYI will significantly improve our primary outcomes of externalizing (e.g. impulsivity, violence, theft) and internalizing (e.g. depression, withdrawal, anxiety, loneliness) behaviors and early and risky sex (i.e. sexual initiation at less than 16 years of age and sexual intercourse without a condom) (Effectiveness).
- b. FYI will significantly lower parental stress, improve maternal emotional health, enhance parenting skills and improve youth Social and Emotional Competence (SEC) to change primary outcomes (Mediation). Aim 2 Community System: To test the effect of ESPI on neighborhood environment compared to Wait List Control.
- a. ESPI significantly will increase our primary outcomes of social interaction, social cohesion, collective efficacy, and shared norms compared to wait list control (Effectiveness).
2b. Engaging residents in community-designed and -led projects to develop common spaces will significantly improve neighborhood perceptions (e.g. attractiveness, safety) and provide opportunities for residents to interact to change primary outcomes (Mediation).
Aim 3 Community and Family Systems: To test the effects of combining FYI and ESPI on the same youth and neighborhood environmental outcomes as in Aims 1 and 2 compared to FYI alone, ESPI alone, and a Wait List Control.
3a. ESPI and FYI will significantly reduce primary youth and neighborhood environmental outcomes (Effectiveness).
3b. ESPI and FYI will change neighborhood environmental and family processes to change primary outcomes of adolescent SEC, external and internal behaviors, and early and risky sex (Mediation).
- Conditions
- Family Relations, Blight
- Being tested
- Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)Behavioural
Also called Family-Youth Intervention (FYI), ESPI Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI)
FYI and ESPI intervention activities will be implemented in the overall study, CHEER. It will also allow us to examine possible synergistic effects of both interventions when implemented in the same neighborhoods. Separate sets of participants will be selected for the FYI comparisons and for the ESPI comparisons. Because the FYI intervention focuses on mothers and their children, participants for the FYI comparisons will be selected by Respondent Driven Sampling of eligible families from the neighborhoods in all four cells. The ESPI intervention targets the whole neighborhood, and thus a random sample of neighborhood residents will be enrolled in each of the four cells. Because the primary outcomes for FYI and ESPI are connected but differ from each other, the FYI samples will be assessed for the FYI outcomes in all four cells and the ESPI samples will be assessed for the ESPI outcomes in all four cells.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Family Youth Intervention (FYI) | Active comparator | The primary objective of FYI is to evaluate the effectiveness of a theory-based, peer-supported family strengthening intervention on the primary outcomes in a sample of 120 parent-child pairs living in resource-poor urban neighborhoods in Birmingham. For FYI, we will utilize community health advisors (CHAs) to implement the intervention. CHAs will be recruited from each FYI neighborhood and will be trained in research ethics. CHAs will assist and support FYI participants in mastering the sequential skills of the 12 modules designed to improve maternal, youth, and family functioning. Additionally, CHAs will provide emotional social support that is helpful, hopeful, and trustful. Receives: Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) |
| ESPI Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI) | Active comparator | ESPI will enroll 500 community members to examine the effect of blight elimination through lot recovery on primary outcomes of improved social interaction, social cohesion around common neighborhood norms, and collective efficacy to effect change in the neighborhoods . Neighborhood residents will select a cluster of lots (2-3) for lot recovery that are highly visible in the neighborhood (e.g. on a main thoroughfare). The community residents will lead the neighborhood projects. In some cases, neighborhood residents will personally undertake all or part of the greening projects. Receives: Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) |
| Wait-List Control | Other | The two communities will get ESPI, upon completion of the study. Receives: Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) |
| FYI and ESPI | Active comparator | Two of the eight neighborhoods will receive both FYI and ESPI intervention. Receives: Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Problem Behaviors in Children Ages 11 to 16 Years.
Three items asked have the child ever been suspended from school and within the past 12 months prior to the baseline survey have they smoked cigarettes or drunk alcohol. Participants choose 1 for yes and 0 for no. The range is form 0 to 3, where 3 describes a higher problematic behavior. Three questions were asked at 1-week and 6 month follow-up: have they been suspended from school, smoked cigarettes or drunk alcohol since baseline.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month Follow-up
Age of Sexual Initiation
Year of age at sex. Two variables were used to measure sexual initiation. Answer choices ranged continuously from 1 (10 years old) to 9 (18 years or older).
Measured: Baseline
Number of Participants Who Participates in Risky Sex
Follow-up questions for individuals endorsing sexual initiation to assess risky sex behavior. The count was assessed on how often did the participant had sex without a condom.
Measured: Baseline
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey- Cohesion Index Subscale
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey assesses city-level variables relating to neighborhood structure. This scale consisted of 7 items that were measured on a scale of 1 to 6. The range of scores are from 7 to 35. The mean score was analyzed where the higher the score the community interaction was the worst.
Measured: Baseline, 12-month Follow up 1 and 18-month Follow up 2
Number of Participants Who Like Living in Their Neighborhood
Survey item on whether they like or dislike living their neighborhood.
Measured: Baseline
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey- Neighborhood Perception
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey assesses city-level variables relating to neighborhood structure. Three items on a scale of 1 to 6, were used to measure how participants perceive their neighborhood. The range of the scores were from 3 to 12. The mean score was analyzed where the higher the score is a better overall perception of their neighborhood.
Measured: Baseline, 12-month Follow up and 18-month Follow-up
Social Contacts and Resources Scale
Social Contacts and Resources Scale, a 5-item measure of social activities with their neighbors. Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 4 (often). a total mean score were derived where higher scores indicating greater social contact. The scores range from 5 to 20.
Measured: Baseline, 12- month Follow up 1, and 18-month Follow up 2
Secondary outcomes (9)
Parent-Adolescent Communication
This is a 20-item scale where response choices range from 1= Strongly Disagree to 5= Strongly Agree. Items are summed to arrive at a total communication score (range 20-100), with higher scores suggesting better overall communication quality.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Parental Nurturance
Measured using using a single item, " I get the emotional help and support I need from my family." The responses to the item is on a 7-point likert scale ranging from Very Strongly Agree to Very Strongly Disagree where Very Strongly Disagree describes a less nurturing parent and Very Strongly Agree describes more nurturance the parent displays. Scores ranged from 1 to 7.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Family Functioning
American Strength Inventory was uses six categories to measure the strength of a family. Participants responded with Not true (1), Sometimes true (2) and Often true (3). The items were added for a total family strength score where a mean score was analyzed. The subscale Global Measure was used to measure family functioning. The scores range from 4 to 12, where the higher the score the higher the family functioning.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Coping
Measured using the Managing Stress and Crisis Effectively subscale of the American Family Strength Inventory assess family functioning and qualities that makes a family strong. Participants responded with Not true (1), Sometimes true (2) and Often true (3). The scores ranged from 6 to 24. The items were added for a total family strength score where a mean score was analyzed. Higher mean scores means higher coping with stress skills.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Perceived Depression
The Patient Health Questionnaire Scale (PHQ-9) is a abbreviated scale that measures self-report depressive symptoms. Respondents report on a 4-point likert scale where 0 is Not at All and 3 is Nearly Everyday. Items were added to determine the presence and severity of depressive symptoms. The range of the scores are 0 to 27. Score interpretations are 1-4 Minimal depression, 5-9 Mild depression, 10-14 Moderate depression,15-19 Moderately severe depression, and 20-27 Severe depression. A mean score was analyzed.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Social Support
Measured using items from the World Health Organization's Quality of Life Questionnaire to measure satisfaction with the level of social support they receive. The responses were on a 5-point likert scale ranging from very dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (5). The higher the score the more scarification with their social support.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
The World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Scale
The World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Scale measures four domains of quality of life: physical health, psychological, social relations and environment. The scores are transformed on a scale from 0 to 100 where higher score mean higher quality of life.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Punitive Discipline Scale
Punitive discipline is assessed using four items that indicate the frequency of spanking/hitting, scolding, and threatening to spank/hit or threatening to punish. Response categories included 1 = never in past 12 months; 2 = a few times; 3 = once a month or more; 4 = once a week or more; and, 5 = almost everyday. After totaling the score, the higher the score the more the parent uses punitive discipline. Scores range from 4 to 20 where the higher the score the more often the parent used punitive discipline. A mean score was analyzed.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Parental Monitoring Scale
Adolescents reported how often their parents knew where they were and what they were doing after school, on weeknights, and on weekends. All items used a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (almost never), to 2 (sometimes), to 3 (usually), to 4 (almost always). Scores ranging from 1 (low levels of parental monitoring) to 4 (high levels of parental monitoring). The range of the scores are 7-28. After totaling the score, the higher the score the higher levels of parental monitoring were present. A mean score was analyzed.
Measured: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Apr 2020
- Study start21 May 2021
- Primary completion10 Aug 2024
- Study completion1 Sep 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Family RelationsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Alabama at BirminghamThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Model description
- Hypotheses will be tested in a 2 X 2 design that includes the independent and combined effects of two interventions targeting the individual, family, and community level. Participating neighborhoods will be assigned into one of four cells: FYI alone, ESPI alone, FYI and ESPI combined, and Wait List Control.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 915 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jeffery Walker, University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Investigators
- Jeff T Walker, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Alabama at Birmingham
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04362475
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 300004617
- Acronym
- CHEER
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 17 Apr 2020
- Last updated
- 13 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Collins WJ, Wanamaker MH. Up from slavery? Black intergenerational economic mobility since 1880.
National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 23395 http://www.nber.org/papers/w23395 (accessed 2018 Jan 27).
Shaw CR, McKay HD. Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1943.
Aneshensel CS, Sucoff CA. The neighborhood context of adolescent mental health. J Health Soc Behav. 1996 Dec;37(4):293-310.
PubMed 8997886Wilson, WJ. The truly disadvantaged. the inner city underclass and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Community Health Through Engagement and Environmental Renewal
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04362475
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CHEER / 300004617
- Conditions
- Family Relations, Blight
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 915 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Alabama at BirminghamUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Study start
- 21 May 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 10 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Sep 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Apr 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 13 Mar 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Community Health from Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) will leverage previous Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) community engagement projects to reach and intervene on a high need population. Disadvantage and poverty have long-term and transgenerational adverse impacts on social interaction and cohesion and residents' emotional and physical health. Mothers living and raising children in these conditions face multiple stressors without the community support previous generations relied on. Decades of research on American cities have connected the social, economic, and physical characteristics of neighborhoods with a lack of social cohesion, inability to maintain shared norms of acceptable behavior,and increases in health disparities and risky behaviors. Social cohesion and collective efficacy inversely associate with depression among youth. In a parallel manner, improved parenting practices and youth behavior directly associate with neighborhood social interactions and social cohesion. While these associations are suggestive, CHEER will directly test causal hypotheses at the neighborhood and family levels in a randomized control trial, that can significantly advance the evidence base for public health interventions: Family Youth Intervention (FYI) and an Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI) to increase social interaction, social cohesion, and collective efficacy and influence wellbeing of mothers and their youth.
Detailed description
Aim 1 Family System: To test the effect of FYI on primary outcomes of youth psychosocial behaviors and sexual risk compared to a Wait List Control.
1a. FYI will significantly improve our primary outcomes of externalizing (e.g. impulsivity, violence, theft) and internalizing (e.g. depression, withdrawal, anxiety, loneliness) behaviors and early and risky sex (i.e. sexual initiation at less than 16 years of age and sexual intercourse without a condom) (Effectiveness).
- b. FYI will significantly lower parental stress, improve maternal emotional health, enhance parenting skills and improve youth Social and Emotional Competence (SEC) to change primary outcomes (Mediation). Aim 2 Community System: To test the effect of ESPI on neighborhood environment compared to Wait List Control.
- a. ESPI significantly will increase our primary outcomes of social interaction, social cohesion, collective efficacy, and shared norms compared to wait list control (Effectiveness).
2b. Engaging residents in community-designed and -led projects to develop common spaces will significantly improve neighborhood perceptions (e.g. attractiveness, safety) and provide opportunities for residents to interact to change primary outcomes (Mediation).
Aim 3 Community and Family Systems: To test the effects of combining FYI and ESPI on the same youth and neighborhood environmental outcomes as in Aims 1 and 2 compared to FYI alone, ESPI alone, and a Wait List Control.
3a. ESPI and FYI will significantly reduce primary youth and neighborhood environmental outcomes (Effectiveness).
3b. ESPI and FYI will change neighborhood environmental and family processes to change primary outcomes of adolescent SEC, external and internal behaviors, and early and risky sex (Mediation).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 4
- Model description
- Hypotheses will be tested in a 2 X 2 design that includes the independent and combined effects of two interventions targeting the individual, family, and community level. Participating neighborhoods will be assigned into one of four cells: FYI alone, ESPI alone, FYI and ESPI combined, and Wait List Control.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Family Youth Intervention (FYI) | Active comparator | Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)The primary objective of FYI is to evaluate the effectiveness of a theory-based, peer-supported family strengthening intervention on the primary outcomes in a sample of 120 parent-child pairs living in resource-poor urban neighborhoods in Birmingham. For FYI, we will utilize community health advisors (CHAs) to implement the intervention. CHAs will be recruited from each FYI neighborhood and will be trained in research ethics. CHAs will assist and support FYI participants in mastering the sequential skills of the 12 modules designed to improve maternal, youth, and family functioning. Additionally, CHAs will provide emotional social support that is helpful, hopeful, and trustful. |
| ESPI Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI) | Active comparator | Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)ESPI will enroll 500 community members to examine the effect of blight elimination through lot recovery on primary outcomes of improved social interaction, social cohesion around common neighborhood norms, and collective efficacy to effect change in the neighborhoods . Neighborhood residents will select a cluster of lots (2-3) for lot recovery that are highly visible in the neighborhood (e.g. on a main thoroughfare). The community residents will lead the neighborhood projects. In some cases, neighborhood residents will personally undertake all or part of the greening projects. |
| Wait-List Control | Other | Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)The two communities will get ESPI, upon completion of the study. |
| FYI and ESPI | Active comparator | Behavioral: Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)Two of the eight neighborhoods will receive both FYI and ESPI intervention. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 11 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- For FYI, parents who reside in the FYI intervention neighborhood (North Titusville, South Titusville, Rising -West Princeton, and Belview Heights) and have a child age 11-16 years.
- For ESPI, residents who live in the ESPI intervention neighborhoods (North Titusville, South Titusville, Druid Hills, and Fountain Heights).
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- For FYI, does not met the above requirements and did not consent to participate.
- For ESPI, not residing in one of the above neighborhoods and did not consent to participate.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER)Also: Family-Youth Intervention (FYI), ESPI Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI)FYI and ESPI intervention activities will be implemented in the overall study, CHEER. It will also allow us to examine possible synergistic effects of both interventions when implemented in the same neighborhoods. Separate sets of participants will be selected for the FYI comparisons and for the ESPI comparisons. Because the FYI intervention focuses on mothers and their children, participants for the FYI comparisons will be selected by Respondent Driven Sampling of eligible families from the neighborhoods in all four cells. The ESPI intervention targets the whole neighborhood, and thus a random sample of neighborhood residents will be enrolled in each of the four cells. Because the primary outcomes for FYI and ESPI are connected but differ from each other, the FYI samples will be assessed for the FYI outcomes in all four cells and the ESPI samples will be assessed for the ESPI outcomes in all four cells. | Behavioural | ESPI Environment: Social and Physical Intervention (ESPI), FYI and ESPI, Family Youth Intervention (FYI), Wait-List Control |
Primary outcome
Problem Behaviors in Children Ages 11 to 16 Years.
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month Follow-up
Three items asked have the child ever been suspended from school and within the past 12 months prior to the baseline survey have they smoked cigarettes or drunk alcohol. Participants choose 1 for yes and 0 for no. The range is form 0 to 3, where 3 describes a higher problematic behavior. Three questions were asked at 1-week and 6 month follow-up: have they been suspended from school, smoked cigarettes or drunk alcohol since baseline.
Age of Sexual Initiation
Time frame: Baseline
Year of age at sex. Two variables were used to measure sexual initiation. Answer choices ranged continuously from 1 (10 years old) to 9 (18 years or older).
Number of Participants Who Participates in Risky Sex
Time frame: Baseline
Follow-up questions for individuals endorsing sexual initiation to assess risky sex behavior. The count was assessed on how often did the participant had sex without a condom.
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey- Cohesion Index Subscale
Time frame: Baseline, 12-month Follow up 1 and 18-month Follow up 2
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey assesses city-level variables relating to neighborhood structure. This scale consisted of 7 items that were measured on a scale of 1 to 6. The range of scores are from 7 to 35. The mean score was analyzed where the higher the score the community interaction was the worst.
Number of Participants Who Like Living in Their Neighborhood
Time frame: Baseline
Survey item on whether they like or dislike living their neighborhood.
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey- Neighborhood Perception
Time frame: Baseline, 12-month Follow up and 18-month Follow-up
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods: Community Survey assesses city-level variables relating to neighborhood structure. Three items on a scale of 1 to 6, were used to measure how participants perceive their neighborhood. The range of the scores were from 3 to 12. The mean score was analyzed where the higher the score is a better overall perception of their neighborhood.
Social Contacts and Resources Scale
Time frame: Baseline, 12- month Follow up 1, and 18-month Follow up 2
Social Contacts and Resources Scale, a 5-item measure of social activities with their neighbors. Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 4 (often). a total mean score were derived where higher scores indicating greater social contact. The scores range from 5 to 20.
9 secondary outcomes
Parent-Adolescent Communication
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Parental Nurturance
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Family Functioning
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Coping
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Perceived Depression
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Social Support
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
The World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Scale
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Punitive Discipline Scale
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Parental Monitoring Scale
Time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month follow up
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Mar 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- BackgroundCollins WJ, Wanamaker MH. Up from slavery? Black intergenerational economic mobility since 1880.
- BackgroundNational Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 23395 http://www.nber.org/papers/w23395 (accessed 2018 Jan 27).
- BackgroundShaw CR, McKay HD. Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1943.
- Background: PubMed 8997886Aneshensel CS, Sucoff CA. The neighborhood context of adolescent mental health. J Health Soc Behav. 1996 Dec;37(4):293-310.
- BackgroundWilson, WJ. The truly disadvantaged. the inner city underclass and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987.
Related trials for Family Relations
Recruiting
Mindfulness Intervention for Psychological and Family Dynamics in Children With Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors
Mindfulness Skills, Psychosocial Education
Enrolling by invitation
Attitudes, Experience and Adaptation to Family Presence in the ICU
ICU Staff Attitudes Toward Family Presence, ICU Staff Experience of Family Presence
Recruiting
Applying CSNAT in HBPC as an Approach to Elder Mistreatment Risk Reduction
Caregiver Stress, Caregiver Health Related QOL
Recruiting
A SMART Evaluation of an Adaptive Web-based AUD Treatment for Service Members and Their Partners
Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Use Disorder
Recruiting
Family Spirit Strengths
Depressive Symptoms, Anxiety Disorders and Symptoms
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jeff T Walker, PhD principal investigator
University of Alabama at Birmingham
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Community Health through Engagement and Environmental Renewal (CHEER) in people with Family Relations and Blight, run by University of Alabama at Birmingham at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 13 Mar 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Problem Behaviors in Children Ages 11 to 16 Years. (time frame: Baseline, 1-week and 6-month Follow-up). The study lists 7 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04362475, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Mar 2026.