Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40087623›Full record

Trial reportBMC women's health2025

Effectiveness of an empowerment-based self-defense program among South African girls: results from a cluster-randomized control trial in schools.

Miriam Hartmann, Shepherd Mutangabende, Stephen Nash, Erica N Browne, Abigail Hatcher, Anna E Kågesten, Sarah T Roberts

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05295342 (A Longitudinal Mixed Method Evaluation of the No Means No Intervention for Violence Prevention in Gqeberha, South Africa), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05295342 nacompletednot on this map

A Longitudinal Mixed Method Evaluation of the No Means No Intervention for Violence Prevention in Gqeberha, South Africa

TypeinterventionalSponsorRTI InternationalRan2022 to 2023Enrolled2,173ConditionsGender-based Violence, Sexual ViolenceArmsNo Means No intervention Girls' Curriculum, No Means No intervention Boys' Curriculum, Active comparator: Life Orientation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Miriam HartmannWomen's Global Health Imperative, RTI International, Berkeley, CA, USA. Miriam.hartmann@ki.se.
Shepherd MutangabendeNo Means No South Africa, Gqeberha, South Africa.
Stephen NashDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Erica N BrowneWomen's Global Health Imperative, RTI International, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Abigail HatcherUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Anna E KågestenDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sarah T RobertsWomen's Global Health Imperative, RTI International, Berkeley, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Empowerment-based self-defense (ESD) programs have proven effective in preventing sexual violence (SV) among girls in diverse settings, yet their effectiveness in South Africa remains unexplored. In this hybrid type 1 cluster-randomized controlled trial, we assessed the impact and implementation of the COVID-adapted 'No Means No' intervention, an ESD program to prevent SV among girls aged 10-19 in Gqeberha, South Africa. Fifteen schools were randomly assigned to one of three trial arms: an arm receiving intervention delivered to girls-only, one receiving interventions delivered to girls and boys seperately, or to serve as controls in a 1:1:1 ratio. Surveys were conducted at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was past-year SV exposure among girls, including harassment or rape. Generlized Estimating Equation models compared the two intervention arms to the control, and each intervention arm to the control. Implementation data consisted of intervention attendence logs, quarterly implementation reports, and in-depth interviews with school stakeholders. We enrolled 1,540 from 14 schools, of whom 1,250 provided primary outcome data. The average age was 13 years and 83% identified as Black. At baseline, 35% of girls reported past-year SV, and 33% did during follow-up. The intervention did not significantly reduce SV compared to the control (adjRR 1.24, 95% CI 0.96, 1.69; p = 0.08). Exploratory analyses examined the effects on secondary outcomes (rape, offline, and online sexual harassment), and on intermediate outcomes (e.g., knowledge and attitudes) with only knowledge of self-defense differing between intervention and control (coefficient 0.42, 95% CI 0.16, 0.68; p = 0.007). Implementation data revealed barriers to implementing in schools post-COVID, including limitations on alloted time and lack of whole-school buy-in. Improved school awareness, willingness to disclose violence, and reductions in bullying were described as impacts of the intervention by stakeholders. While the lack of reduction in SV may point towards areas for improvement, numerous contextual and implementation factors may also have influenced results. Future trials should utilize implementation science methods to improve delivery and rigorously evaluate ESD interventions' impact on disclosure, acknowledging the complexity of assessing their effects on various facets of SV. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05295342).

Indexed as

EmpowermentSex OffensesAdolescentChildCOVID-19FemaleHumansProgram EvaluationSchoolsSexual HarassmentSouth AfricaYoung AdultCluster-randomized control trialEmpowerment self-defense[list 3–10] adolescent girlsSchoolsSexual violenceSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID40087623
PMCPMC11907951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.