ArticleMaternal and child health journal2019
Evaluating the Whoops Proof S.C. Campaign: A Pair-Matched Group Pretest-Posttest Quasi-experimental Study.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contraceptive access reform and abortion: Evidence from Delaware.Health services research · 2023Article
- An evaluation of the Be Your Own Baby public awareness campaign.Health services research · 2021Article
- The HER Salt Lake media campaign: comparing characteristics and outcomes of clients who make appointments online versus standard scheduling.BMC women's health · 2021Observational
- "Study Natural" without Drugs: An Exploratory Study of Theory-Guided and Tailored Health Campaign Interventions to Prevent Nonmedical Use of Prescription Stimulants in College Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn South Carolina, 50% of all pregnancies are unintended. Intrauterine devices (IUDs) and the implant are recommended as top-tier contraceptive options for all women and adolescents. The Whoops Proof S.C. campaign was evaluated to determine if women (ages 18 to 29) who do not intend to become pregnant in the next year report greater awareness of and positive regard for IUDs and the implant after exposure to a multi-channel campaign.
methodsA pair-matched group pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design was utilized. A total of 1,439 women responded to the pretest survey (May-July 2016) and 1,534 responded to the posttest survey (October-November 2016) in four South Carolina counties. Statistical analysis include paired-sample and independent t-tests and one-way ANOVA tests for variance.
resultsAt posttest, intervention county participants were significantly more likely to recall messaging and to report receiving contraceptive information from Whoops Proof S.C (t(1533)= - 8.466, p < .0001). Participants who saw ads more than once per week reported a significant increase in awareness of IUDs and the implant (F(6,1532) = 5.571; p < .001). Participants in intervention counties reported a significant increase in positive attitudes toward IUDs (t(616) = - 1.740; p = .041) and the implant (t(603)= - 1.665; p = .048). DISCUSSION: The Whoops Proof S.C. campaign offers strategies to campaign planners and health care providers to optimize exposure and recall frequency to increase awareness of and positive regard for highly effective contraceptive methods. Campaign planners should test messages and focus on communication channels to increase engagement and avoid saturation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30707341What 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.