Adolescents

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

The FCU intervention predicted a significantly less severe decline in parent-youth relationship quality from ages 12-15, with intervention families maintaining better relationship trajectories than co

Effect: improvement; β = .16

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10

IPT-AST did not produce significantly different rates of change in social anxiety symptoms compared to school counseling during either the intervention or follow-up phase, despite IPT-AST's focus on i

Effect: null; t(91) = -0.10