Study Details
Cole, R., Schulte Neelan, T., Langan, A., Keating, B., Walzer, J., Asheer, S., Zief, S. (2022). The impact of the Making Proud Choices! teen pregnancy prevention curriculum. Office of Population Affairs, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Making Proud Choices!
Program Information
Evaluation Setting
Study Sample
Research Design
2810
1
Approximately six months after programming ended. Approximately nine months after baseline, on average.
Study Findings
The program was evaluated using a cluster randomized controlled trial involving male and female youth recruited from 15 high schools in Mobile, Alabama; Detroit, Michigan; St. Louis, Missouri; and Cincinnati, Ohio. Schools were randomly assigned in each of three years to a treatment group that received the Making Proud Choices! Program or a control group that received business-as-usual services. Surveys were administered immediately before the program (baseline), and six months after the end of the program.
The study found that six months after the end of the program, youth participating in MPC reported having had sex significantly fewer times in the past three months compared with youth in the control group (effect size = -0.10). The study found no statistically significant program impacts on the other eligible outcomes examined: ever had sex, any sex in the past three months, count of vaginal sex partners in past three months, any sex without a condom in past three months, times having any sex without a condom in past three months, sex without birth control in past three months, times having sex without birth control in past three months, ever pregnant, any STI.
The study also examined program impacts on measures of knowledge of HIV or STIs, pregnancy, condoms, and other forms of contraception; beliefs about sexual activity as a teen, communication with partners, and condom use; attitudes about condom use; skill and self-efficacy related to condom use, condom use negotiation, and refusal. 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.