Research has shown that the original d.a.r.e. program, which was widely used and very popular,

1. McNeal RB, Hanson WB. An examination of strategies for gaining convergent validity in natural experiments: D.A.R.E. as an illustrative case study. Eval Rev. 1995;19:141–158. [Google Scholar]

2. Donnermeyer J, Wurschmidt T. Educators’ perceptions of the D.A.R.E. program. J Drug Educ. 1997;27:259–276. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Ennett ST, Tobler NS, Ringwalt CL, Flewelling RL. How effective is Drug Abuse Resistance Education? A meta-analysis of Project DARE outcome evaluations. Am J Public Health. 1994;84:1394–1401. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Hanson WB. Pilot test results comparing the All Stars Program with seventh grade D.A.R.E.: program Integrity and mediating variable analysis. Subst Use Misuse. 1996;31:1359–1377. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Hanson WB, McNeal RB. How D.A.R.E. works: an examination of program effects on mediating variables. Health Educ Behav. 1997;24:165–176. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Lynam DR, Milich R, Zimmerman R, et al. Project DARE: no effects at 10-year follow-up. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1999;67:590–593. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, Bachman JG. National Survey Results on Drug Use From the Monitoring the Future Study, 1975–1998. Volume I: Secondary School Students. Rockville, Md: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 1999. NIH publication 99-4660.

8. Gorman DM. The effectiveness of DARE and other drug use prevention programs. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:873. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Rosenthal R. Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 1991.

10. DasEiden R, Reifman A. Effects of Brazelton demonstrations on later parenting: a meta-analysis. J Pediatr Psychol. 1996;21:857–868. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Amato PR, Keith B. Parental divorce and well-being of children: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1991;110:26–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Shadish WR, Haddock CK. Combining estimates of effect size. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1994:261–281.

13. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.

14. Ahmed NU, Ahmed NS, Bennett CR, Hinds JE. Impact of a drug abuse resistance education (D.A.R.E.) program in preventing the initiation of cigarette smoking in fifth- and sixth-grade students. J Natl Med Assoc. 2002;94:249–256. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Shedler J, Block J. Adolescent drug use and psychological health: a longitudinal inquiry. Am Psychol. 1990;45:612–630. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Rosenbaum DP, Hanson GS. Assessing the effects of a school-based drug education: a six-year multilevel analysis of Project D.A.R.E. J Res Crime Delinquency. 1998;35:381–412. [Google Scholar]

17. Improving and evaluating the DARE school-based substance abuse prevention curriculum. Available at: http://www.rwjf.org/programs/grantDetail.jsp?id=040371. Accessed January 8, 2003.

18. Ringwalt C, Ennett ST, Holt KD. An outcome evaluation of Project DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education). Health Educ Res. 1991;6:327–337. [Google Scholar]

19. Becker HK, Agopian MW, Yeh S. Impact evaluation of drug abuse resistance education (DARE). J Drug Educ. 1992;22:283–291. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Harmon MA. Reducing the risk of drug involvement among early adolescents: an evaluation of drug abuse resistance education (D.A.R.E.). Eval Rev. 1993;17:221–239. [Google Scholar]

21. Ennett ST, Rosenbaum DP, Flewelling RL, Bieler GS, Ringwalt CL, Bailey SL. Long-term evaluation of drug abuse resistance education. Addict Behav. 1994;19:113–125. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Rosenbaum DP, Flewelling RL, Bailey SL, Ringwalt CL, Wilkinson DL. Cops in the classroom: a longitudinal evaluation of drug abuse resistance education (D.A.R.E.). J Res Crime Delinquency. 1994;31:3–31. [Google Scholar]

23. Wysong E, Aniskiewicz R, Wright D. Truth and DARE: tracking drug education to graduation and as symbolic politics. Soc Probl. 1994;41:448–472. [Google Scholar]

24. Dukes RL, Ullman JB, Stein JA. Three-year follow-up of drug abuse resistance education (D.A.R.E.). Eval Rev. 1996;20:49–66. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Zagumny MJ, Thompson MK. Does D.A.R.E. work? An evaluation in rural Tennessee. J Alcohol Drug Educ. 1997;42:32–41. [Google Scholar]

26. Thombs DL. A retrospective study of DARE: substantive effects not detected in undergraduates. J Alcohol Drug Educ. 2000;46:27–40. [Google Scholar]

Page 2

Primary Articles Included in the Meta-Analysis

Study (Year)	Sample	r	d	95% Confidence Interval
Ringwalt et al. (1991)18	5th & 6th graders (n = 1270; 52% female/48% male; 50% African American/40% Anglo/10% other), posttested immediately	0.025	0.056	−0.06, 0.16
Becker et al. (1992)19	5th graders (n = 2878), posttested immediately	−0.058	−0.117	−0.19, −0.04
Harmon (1993)20	5th graders (n = 708), posttested immediately	0.015	0.030	−0.12, 0.18
Ennett et al. (1994)21	7th & 8th graders (n = 1334; 54% Anglo/22% African American/9% Hispanic/15% other), 2 years post-D.A.R.E.	0.000	0.000a	−0.11, 0.11
Rosenbaum et al. (1994)22	6th & 7th graders (n = 1584; 49.7% female/50.3% male; 49.9% Anglo/24.7% AfricanAmerican/8.9% Hispanic/16.5% other) 1 year post-D.A.R.E.	0.000	0.000a	−0.10, 0.10
Wysong et al. (1994)23	12th graders (n = 619), 5 years post-D.A.R.E.	0.000	0.000a	−0.16, 0.16
Dukes et al. (1996)24	9th graders (n = 849), 3 years post-D.A.R.E.	0.035	0.072	−0.06, 0.21
Zagumny & Thompson (1997)25	6th graders (n = 395; 48% female/52% male), 4–5 years post-D.A.R.E.	0.184	0.376	0.07, 0.68
Lynam et al. (1999)6	6th graders (n = 1002; 57% female/43% male; 75.1% Anglo/20.4% African American/0.5% other), 10 years post-D.A.R.E.	0.000	0.000a	−0.15, 0.15
Thombs (2000)26	5th through 10th graders (n = 630; 90.4% Anglo, 5.5% African American, 4.1% other), posttested at least 1 to 6 years post-D.A.R.E.	0.025	0.038	−0.15, 0.23
Ahmed et al. (2002)14	5th and 6th graders (n = 236; 50% female/50% male; 69% Anglo, 24% African American,7% other), posttested immediately	0.198	0.405	0.01, 0.80