Study Details
Language on this page comes directly from the program model developer or authors. It does not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or any federal agency.
Covington, Reginald D., Wood, Robert G., & Goesling, Brian. (2019). Focusing on the boys: The longer-term impacts of Wise Guys in Davenport, Iowa. OPRE Report # 2019-97. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation.
Wise Guys
Program Information
Evaluation Setting
Study Sample
Research Design
736
2
Two years after start of intervention
Study Findings
The Wise Guys intervention was evaluated using a randomized controlled trial involving boys recruited from seven middle schools in and around Davenport, Iowa. Participants were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that received the 14-week Wise Guys program or a control group that did not; both groups also received business-as-usual school sexuality and reproductive health education. Surveys were administered at baseline, one year, and two years post intervention, but the study presents data only for the second follow-up.
At two years post intervention, the study had no significant findings on the eligible outcome: ever had sexual intercourse. The study also examined impacts on measures of knowledge of contraception and STI; support for abstinence; support for condom use; motivation to avoid teen pregnancy; intentions to have sexual intercourse; support for respect in romantic relationships; disapproval of dating violence; goals and plans for future career; communication with parents; and perceived conflict management ability. 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.