ArticlePloS one2025
Effects of behavior change techniques in interventions promoting condom use among youth in the Global North.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeclines in condom use among the general young population highlight the need for effective interventions to prevent sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancies. With this study, we aim to examine the relationship between Behavior Change Techniques (BCTs, the active components of interventions) and the effects of condom interventions among youth. We quantify the number of BCTs used in the interventions, assess their alignment with underlying behavioral theory, and evaluate coverage of specified Mechanisms of Action (MoA, underlying process through which behavior may be influenced) within the behavioral theory.
methodsFace-to-face theory-based interventions aiming to promote condom use among youth were identified in a previous systematic review. Interventions were analyzed using the BCT Taxonomy v.1.0., alignment with theory was determined using the Theories and Techniques tool. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests assessed BCT effectiveness. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient determined associations between intervention effects and the total number of BCTs, the proportion of BCTs aligned with MoAs, and the proportion of MoA covered by BCTs.
resultsIn 21 interventions we identified a median of 3 BCTs (IQR = 1-5) per intervention. BCTs were poorly reported. No grouping of BCTs was associated with more intervention effects on increasing condom use. Neither the proportion of BCTs aligned with the MoAs of the underlying theory in the intervention (median = 85.7%, IQR = 50.0-100%, Spearman's ρ = -0.09) nor the proportion of MoAs of the underlying theory covered by at least one BCT in the intervention (median = 44.4%, IQR = 25.0-50.0%, Spearman's ρ = 0.27) were correlated with intervention effects.
conclusionsThis study provides initial insights into the use of BCTs and the application of behavioral theory in theory-based condom promotion interventions targeting the general young population. No associations between the use of BCTs and the intervention effects on condom use were found. Robust conclusions regarding the utilization of BCTs, their alignment with theory, and their effects can only be reached when future research consistently and comprehensively reports the use of BCTs.
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.