In this way, communities can develop common conceptual models, common language, and procedures that maximize the effectiveness of programs at each level of need. Schools, in coordination with community providers, are a potential setting for the creation of such fully-integrated models. It is surprising that few comprehensive interventions have been developed and evaluated that combine school-wide primary prevention together with secondary prevention and treatment. The past decade has brought to fruition well-designed studies that demonstrate the potential of preventive intervention in reducing harmful symptoms for children and youth. However, given the need for effective research in this field there are numerous issues for future research, policy, and practice.
Few studies meet the criteria for fully-validated program models.
One of the weaknesses in present research efforts is the lack of comprehensive follow-up data to chart the developmental processes of program participants in the years after receiving interventions. There has been greater attention to preventive interventions that have been focused on externalizing disorders. As such, we still know little regarding effective prevention models for internalizing disorders. Further, outcome measures should include assessment of both externalizing and internalizing symptoms. A broader point is that there is significant inter-individual variability in program effects.