ArticleThe Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine2014
Adolescent age at time of receipt of one or more sexual risk reduction interventions.
Article in The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adolescent HIV Risk Reduction in the Bahamas: Results from Two Randomized Controlled Intervention Trials Spanning Elementary School Through High School.AIDS and behavior · 2016Trial
- The impact of parent involvement in an effective adolescent risk reduction intervention on sexual risk communication and adolescent outcomes.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2014Trial
- Effectiveness of a pre-adolescent inter-generational intervention to address HIV and obesity in South Africa, using a pretest-posttest design.BMC public health · 2021Article
- HIV comprehensive knowledge and prevalence among young adolescents in Nigeria: evidence from Akwa Ibom AIDS indicator survey, 2017.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Quantum changes in self-efficacy and condom-use intention among youth: A chained cusp catastrophe model.Journal of adolescence · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAge of the target audience at time of intervention is thought to be a critical variable influencing the effectiveness of adolescent sexual risk reduction interventions. Despite this postulated importance, to date, studies have not been designed to enable a direct comparison of outcomes according to age at the time of intervention delivery.
methodsWe examined outcomes of 598 youth who were sequentially involved in two randomized controlled trials of sexual risk prevention interventions, the first one delivered in grade 6 (Focus on Youth in the Caribbean [FOYC]) and the second one in grade 10 (Bahamian Focus on Older Youth [BFOOY]). Four groups were examined, including those who received (1) both treatment conditions, FOYC and BFOOY; (2) FOYC in grade 6 and the control condition in grade 10; (3) the control condition in grade 6 and BFOOY in grade 10; and (4) both control conditions. Intentions, perceptions, condom-use skills, and HIV-related knowledge were assessed over 60 months.
resultsData showed that those who received both interventions had the greatest increase in condom-use skills. Youth who received FOYC in grade 6 had greater scores in knowledge and intention.
conclusionThese results suggest that youth receive the most protection with early and repeated exposure to interventions. These findings suggest that educators should consider implementing HIV prevention and risk reduction programs as a fixed component of education curriculum beginning in the preadolescent years and if possible also during the adolescent years.
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.