Sample description Clause Samples

Sample description. The median age of the participants in this study was 20.5 years. Eight participants were high school students. Twelve participants had complete high school, 6 of whom were in college. Nine young women were mothers, most of whom (n =7) had only one child. The median age of initiation of sex was 15 years. Eleven participants self-identified as secondary abstainers. Length of abstinence at the time of the interview ranged from approximately four weeks to one year. Thirteen young women had boyfriends, 6 of whom were secondary abstainers. Two were in a romantic relationship with a male they did not formally classify as a boyfriend. One had only a casual sexual partner with whom she was not involved romantically. Six young women who remained sexually active (75%) believed abstinence may negatively impact their relationship. Four reported there were not in a relationship.

Sample description. A sub sample of nine caregivers was selected for the qualitative component of this study. At the time of the interviews, all of the caregivers had successfully completed the randomized controlled trial that served as the parent study for this project. With the exception of one, all of the caregivers were still providing full time care for their loved ones. One of the participants experienced the loss of her husband approximately three weeks prior to her interview. The in-depth interviews were on average 45 minutes long and at times were up to an hour in length. The following table is a summary of characteristics of each of the respondents in the qualitative sub-sample. Table 4.9. Qualitative Sample Characteristics CG ID Gender Age Marital Status Education Occupation Relationship with CR Age of CR Length of Time as CG1 AD 10 F 56 Married College Retired Mother 80 42 AD 13 F 43 Single College In Transition Father 75 10 AD 39 F 70 Married Post Grad Retired Husband 80 52 AD 43 F 67 Married College Retired Mother 87 23 AD 54 F 60 Single Technical Unemployed Aunt 73 38 AD 55 F 52 Married HS Grad Unemployed Mother 75 77 AD 89 F 59 Married College RN2 Husband 65 60 AD 91 M 59 Married Post Grad Retired Wife 57 36 AD 93 M 61 Married HS Grad Caregiver Wife 63 36 The mean age of the caregivers in the subsample was 59, while the recipients’ age was an average of 73 year of age, both averages close to overall sample mean. The length of time the care recipients required care due to their dementing illness was close to 2 years with the range being as recent as one year and as long as 6 years. Overall, the caregivers reported moderate levels of caregiver burden with Zarit mean score of 34. In regards to risk of poor mental health outcomes, this group reported higher levels of anxiety with PROMIS scores of 54. Table 4.10. Qualitative Sample Characteristics of Continuous Measures Caregiver Age 43 70 58.56 7.92 Care Recipient’s Age 57 87 72.78 9.50 Length of Time Needing Care 1 6 2.78 1.86 Zarit Burden Score 15 61 33.63 17.52 PROMIS Anxiety T-score 42 70 53.83 8.64 PROMIS Depression T-score 37 59 45.34 8.63 Everyday Discrimination 36 54 49.89 7.88 Discrimination - Vigilance 9 24 19.33 5.39 In order to address this specific aim, caregivers were asked general questions about their caregiving experience, then more specifically about burden. Racial differences between Black and White caregivers were also discussed. If caregivers felt racial differences existed, follow up question...

Sample description. Panel A of Table 1 provides descriptive statistics for the firm-level characteristics included in my incentives variable for the entire sample. The logarithm of total assets measured in million US dollars for the sample companies has a mean (median) value of

Sample description. One hundred sixty three patients were recruited at the baseline. The sample’s socio- demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline are described in detail in chapter 3. 56 % were male , showed a mean age at onset of 30 years, were on average one year older at first contact with the CMHC (31 years ± 9.4) and 39 (24%) were migrants. They were mainly single (72%); 46% had a high school diploma, 43% were employed and 54% still lived with their family of origin. 80 % had a DUP < 1 year and 41% received the ICD-10 diagnosis of Schizophrenia. About one third of the sample (n 50, 31%) abused substances; they were all younger than 35 years of age (43% among patients younger than 35 years). Among substance users, 74% used cannabis (n 37), 44% (n 22) alcohol, 32% (n 16) stimulants or hallucinogens and 12% (n 6) opioids. More than half of the substance users were multidrug-users (n 26, 54%) Users were significantly younger at psychosis onset (24.8 ±4.7 v. 33.0 ±9.8 years, p<0.0001) as well as at the first contact with the mental health services (25.3±4.6 v. 33.6±9.9 years, p<0.0001). FEP substance users were more frequently male. After adjusting for age and gender, patients with substance use were 2.8 times more likely to be native Italians. As described in our previous study (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2012), among the substance users, 23 received a simple diagnosis of Substance-Induced Psychosis (F10-19); 27 received a dual diagnosis of non-affective psychosis (F20-29, n=22) or affective psychosis (F30-33,n=5) and substance-related disorder (abuse or dependence). For all psychoses, the mean age at the onset and at first contact was significantly younger for men but not for affective or substance-related psychosis.

Sample description. In Table 2, we present descriptive statistics of all variables by parents’ residential status at the three-year survey. Consistent with expectations, fathers’ parenting varies by residential status. For example, residential fathers spend an average of 3.2 days per week engaged in activities with their five-year-old children, while nonresidential fathers spend an average of 1.0 day engaged in activities (p < .001). Compared to nonresidential fathers, residential fathers have greater shared responsibility (p < .001) and cooperation (p < .001) in parenting. Further, recent incarceration is common, particularly among nonresidential fathers. About 8% of residential and 30% of nonresidential fathers were recently incarcerated. [Table 2.] Residential and nonresidential parents also differ in other ways, with residential parents reporting more demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral advantages. Among residential fathers, more than one-quarter (28%) are non-Hispanic White, about one-third (36%) are non- Hispanic Black, and about one-third (31.1%) are Hispanic. Among nonresidential fathers, only 9% are non-Hispanic White and 21% are Hispanic, and more than two-thirds (68%) are non- Hispanic Black. Educational attainment also varies across residential status. Although nearly half (48%) of residential fathers had education beyond high school, this was true of only one-quarter (27%) of nonresidential fathers. Residential fathers are also older, report higher relationship quality, are more likely to be employed, have higher income-to-poverty ratios, report less material hardship, and report less depression.