Study Details

Citation

Herrling, S., Hirsch, H. (2021). An evaluation of Achieving Condom Empowerment (ACE)-Plus in foster care agencies in New York City. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2021.1959473

Program or Component Study?
Program
Program or Component Name

Achieving Condom Empowerment (ACE)-Plus

Show Evidence of Effectiveness
No
Study Rating and Explanation
High —

This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that would suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the program

Program Information

Program Type
Programs for special populations
Program Length
Fewer than 10 sessions

Evaluation Setting

Evaluation Setting
Systems/institutions

Study Sample

Average Age Group
18 or 19
Majority Racial/Ethnic Group
African American or Black
Sex
Young male

Research Design

Assignment Method
Randomized controlled trial
Sample Size

223

Number of Follow-Ups

2

Length of Last Follow-Up

9 months following the end of the second program session

Year of Last Data Collection
2017

Study Findings

Result Contraceptive Use
Indeterminate evidence
Reviewed Studies
High-Quality Randomized Trial
Protocol Version
Version 6.0
Details

The program was evaluated using a randomized controlled trial involving young men recruited from nine foster care agencies in New York City. Participants were randomly assigned to either a treatment that received the two-session ACE-Plus program or a control group that received the two-session On Track program. Surveys were administered before programming (baseline), three months after programming ended, and nine months after it ended.



At the three- and nine-month follow-ups, the study found no statistically significant program impacts for vaginal sex in the past three months without a condom or hormonal birth control use in the past three months. The study also examined program impacts on measures of confidence in a female sex partner(s) use of birth control in the prior three months; a visit to a clinic or doctor with sexual partner(s) to get birth control in the prior three months; and communication with sexual partner(s) about the type of birth control they were using in the prior three months. Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review.

Effect Sizes
{"0": {"ProgramName":"Achieving Condom Empowerment (ACE)-Plus","StudyID":"PPRER0S22013","ManuscriptID":"PPRER0S22013","Rating":"High","OutcomeName":"Number of times having vaginal sex without use of condom","OutcomeDomain":"Contraceptive Use","OutcomeDichotomous":"No","SampleType":"Full sample","FUTimingMonths":"3","FUReference":"End of program","MeanTreat":"2.39","MeanComp":"1.72","TpperES":"0.092","StatSigRepEffect":"No","RepEffectFavorable":"Not significant","RepEffectMeet":"No"},"1": {"ProgramName":"Achieving Condom Empowerment (ACE)-Plus","StudyID":"PPRER0S22013","ManuscriptID":"PPRER0S22013","Rating":"High","OutcomeName":"Number of times having vaginal sex without use of condom","OutcomeDomain":"Contraceptive Use","OutcomeDichotomous":"No","SampleType":"Full sample","FUTimingMonths":"9","FUReference":"End of program","MeanTreat":"3.25","MeanComp":"2.21","TpperES":"0.097","StatSigRepEffect":"No","RepEffectFavorable":"Not significant","RepEffectMeet":"No"},"2": {"ProgramName":"Achieving Condom Empowerment (ACE)-Plus","StudyID":"PPRER0S22013","ManuscriptID":"PPRER0S22013","Rating":"High","OutcomeName":"Number of times having vaginal sex without use of hormonal method of birth control","OutcomeDomain":"Contraceptive Use","OutcomeDichotomous":"No","SampleType":"Full sample","FUTimingMonths":"3","FUReference":"End of program","MeanTreat":"1.26","MeanComp":"0.72","TpperES":"0.115","StatSigRepEffect":"No","RepEffectFavorable":"Not significant","RepEffectMeet":"No"}}

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.