Study Details
Brown, S.A., Turner, R.E., Christensen, C. (2021). Linking families and teens: Randomized controlled trial study of a family communication and sexual health education program for rural youth and their parents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 69(3), 398–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2021.05.020
Linking Families and Teens (LiFT)
Program Information
Evaluation Setting
Study Sample
Research Design
886
2
12 months after the intervention workshop.
Study Findings
Linking Families and Teens (LiFT) was evaluated using a cluster randomized controlled trial involving family dyads made up of a high-school-age youth paired with their parenting adult. The dyads were recruited from 21 rural community sites (such as schools and health care locations) across nine states. Participants were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that received the six-hour LiFT program or to a control group that did not receive a program. Surveys were administered before the program (baseline), three months after the program ended, and 12 months after the program ended.
The study found that three months after the program ended, participating youth were significantly less likely to report having experienced a pregnancy (effect size = 0.37) than control group youth were, but no statistically significant effect on this outcome was found at 12 months. Three and 12 months after the program ended, the study found no statistically significant program impacts on the other eligible outcomes examined: ever had vaginal sex, and having unprotected sex at last intercourse.
The study also examined program impacts on measures of perceived competency to prevent pregnancy (a scale score based on five items with four response categories) and communication with a parenting adult about sexuality and preventing pregnancy (a scale score based on six items with five response categories). Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review.
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.