Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2002
Improving teenagers' knowledge of emergency contraception: cluster randomised controlled trial of a teacher led intervention.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Characteristics and practices of school-based cluster randomised controlled trials for improving health outcomes in pupils in the United Kingdom: a methodological systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- School-based interventions for improving contraceptive use in adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Interventions for preventing unintended pregnancies among adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Interventions for encouraging sexual behaviours intended to prevent cervical cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Lay health workers in primary and community health care for maternal and child health and the management of infectious diseases.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- [Effectiveness of educational interventions for the prevention of pregnancy in adolescents].Atencion primariaPooled it
- Effectiveness of peer-led education interventions on contraceptive use, unmet need, and demand among adolescent girls in Gedeo Zone, South Ethiopia. A cluster randomized controlled trial.Global health action · 2023Trial
- HIV prevention in Mexican schools: prospective randomised evaluation of intervention.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006Trial
- Multidisciplinary peer-led sexual and reproductive health education programme in France, a prospective controlled-study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Getting Intentional about Intention to Use: A Scoping Review of Person-Centered Measures of Demand.Studies in family planning · 2022Article
- Effects of preconception care and periconception interventions on maternal nutritional status and birth outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2021Review
- Knowledge and use of emergency contraception among students of public secondary schools in Ilorin, Nigeria.The Pan African medical journal · 2016Article
- Emergency contraception. Widely available and effective but disappointing as a public health intervention: a review.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2015Review
- Medical students as sexual health peer educators: who benefits more?BMC medical education · 2014Article
- Household cost-benefit equations and sustainable universal childhood immunisation: a randomised cluster controlled trial in south Pakistan [ISRCTN12421731].BMC public health · 2005Article
- Factors associated with nurses' knowledge and prescriptive attitudes toward emergency contraception in Northern Nigeria.Annals of African medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effectiveness of a teacher led intervention to improve teenagers' knowledge about emergency contraception.
designCluster randomised controlled trial.
setting24 mixed sex, state secondary schools in Avon, south west England.
participants1974 boys and 1820 girls in year 10 (14-15 year olds).
interventionTeachers gave a single lesson on emergency contraception to year 10 pupils. The teachers had previously received in-service training on giving the lesson. The pupils were actively involved during the lesson.
main outcome measuresQuestionnaires distributed to pupils at baseline and six months after the intervention assessed their knowledge of the correct time limits for hormonal emergency contraception and for use of the intrauterine device as emergency contraception, the proportion of pupils who were not virgins, the proportion who had used emergency contraception, and the pupils' intention to use emergency contraception in the future.
resultsThe proportion of pupils knowing the correct time limits for both types of emergency contraception was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group at six months' follow up (hormonal contraception: proportion of boys 15.9% higher (95% confidence interval 6.5% to 25.3%), girls 20.4% (10.4% to 30.4%); intrauterine device used as emergency contraception: boys 4.2% (0.7% to 7.7%), girls 10.7% (0.4% to 21.0%). The number of pupils needed to be taught for one more pupil to know the correct time limits was six for boys and five for girls. The intervention and control groups did not differ in the proportion of pupils who were not virgins, in the proportion who had used emergency contraception, and in the proportion intending to use emergency contraception in the future.
conclusionsThe intervention significantly improved the proportion of boys and girls knowing the correct time limits for both types of emergency contraception. The intervention did not change the pupils' sexual activity or use of emergency contraception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.