Finally, we examined prevention program effects on risky outcomes. Logistic regressions were computed to determine whether assignment to intervention condition (compared with control) was associated with differences in the timing of the initiation of tobacco use, drug/alcohol use, or sexual intercourse, or associated with pregnancy or STDs that are used in the LCA analyses. No significant effects emerged (all p s>.10). We were also interested in determining whether intervention affected youth’s problem profiles, represented by the latent classes. In particular, we wanted to determine whether intervention reduced the risk that high-risk youth would be classified into classes 1 or 2 (where risk for pregnancy and STDs was concentrated) compared with class 4 (the low-risk class). Intervention-control group assignment was incorporated in the latent class model to predict latent class membership probabilities. However, none of these comparisons indicated a significant impact of intervention status on profile membership for boys or girls (all ps>.10). When youth were assigned to their most likely class membership using posterior probabilities, the proportion of youth assigned to each class was similar for the intervention and control
