Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This trial found no evidence that the Good Behaviour Game in primary schools improved conduct problems or other outcomes in 7- to 8-year-old children.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Neil Humphrey 1,*, Alexandra Hennessey 1, Patricio Troncoso 1,2, Margarita Panayiotou 1, Louise Black 1, Kimberly Petersen 1, Lawrence Wo 1, Carla Mason 1, Emma Ashworth 3, Kirsty Frearson 1, Jan R Boehnke 4, Rhys D Pockett 5, Julia Lowin 5, David Foxcroft 6, Michael Wigelsworth 1, Ann Lendrum 1

1 Manchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
2 Institute for Social Policy, Housing, Equalities Research, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK
3 School of Psychology, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK
4 School of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
5 Swansea Centre for Health Economics, University of Swansea, Swansea, UK
6 Department of Psychology, Health and Professional Development, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK
* Corresponding author Email: neil.humphrey@manchester.ac.uk

Declared competing interests of authors: Jan R Boehnke discloses roles as a co-investigator on several randomised trials of school-based interventions funded by the Education Endowment Foundation and Department for Education (for which his institution received payment), in addition to acting as an expert reviewer of statistical analysis plans for the Education Endowment Foundation and being co-editor-in-chief of Quality of Life Research (for which he has received personal honoraria).

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document