Study Details
Coyle, K. K., Glassman, J. R., Franks, H. M., Campe, S. M., Denner, J., & Lepore, G. M. (2013). Interventions to reduce sexual risk behaviors among youth in alternative schools: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), 68–78.
Glassman, J. R., Franks, H. M., Baumler, E. R., & Coyle, K. K. (2014). Mediation analysis of an adolescent HIV/STI/pregnancy prevention intervention. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 14(5), 497-509.
All4You2! + Service learning
Program Information
Evaluation Setting
Study Sample
Research Design
369
2
18 months after baseline
Study Findings
The evaluation was conducted using a four-arm experimental design involving 47 classrooms (765 youth) drawn from 11 district-run continuation high schools in Northern California. Students' school classrooms were randomized into one of four experimental conditions: (1) the All4You2! treatment condition; (2) a service learning condition; (3) the treatment intervention combined with the service learning condition; or (4) an attention control condition. Students completed three surveys (baseline plus two follow-up surveys at six and 18 months). The All4You2! intervention consisted of 32 hours of instruction, taught two or three times a week during school hours. In the service learning condition, students made nine visits during the school day to volunteer sites. They also participated in lessons involving preparation and reflection activities.
This summary presents the effectiveness of the All4You2! intervention combined with the service learning condition relative to the attention control.
The results of the study suggest that all outcomes for the All4You2! intervention combined with the service learning group were null/indeterminate. There were no statistically significant behavioral effects relative to the control condition in the sexual activity, number of partners, or contraceptive use domains.
The study also reported findings that did not meet TPPER standards. One set of findings was reported only for subgroups defined by sexual activity at follow-up; analyses for endogenous subgroups received a low rating. Another set of findings was reported for samples defined by their sexual experience at baseline; however, these contrasts were deemed to have high attrition and did not demonstrate baseline equivalence, so they received a low rating.
NA = Not available. This means the authors did not report the information in the manuscripts associated with the studies we reviewed.
a This information was not available whenever authors did not report information for the treatment and comparison groups separately on outcome means, standard deviations, and/or sample sizes.
b Authors reported that the program effect (impact) estimate is statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.05 based on a two-tailed test.
c For some outcomes, having less of that outcome is favorable. In those cases, an effect with a negative sign is favorable to the treatment group (that is, the treatment group had a more favorable outcome than the comparison group, on average).
d An effect shows credibly estimated, statistically significant evidence whenever it has a p-value of less than 0.05 based on a two-tailed test, includes the appropriate adjustment for clustering (if applicable), and it is not based on an endogenous subgroup.
Language directly from the program model developer or authors.