Study Details
Zimmerman, R. S., Cupp, P. K., Donohew, L., Sionean, C. K., Feist-Price, S., Helme, D. (2008). Effects of a school-based, theory-driven HIV and pregnancy prevention curriculum. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 40(1), 42-51.
Reducing the Risk
Program Information
Evaluation Setting
Study Sample
Research Design
1944
2
12
Study Findings
A subsequent study conducted by a separate group of researchers examined the effectiveness of an adapted version of the program designed to target high sensation-seeking and impulsive youth. The study used a cluster randomized trial involving ten high schools in the Louisville, KY, area and seven high schools in Cleveland, Ohio. Each school was randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) a treatment group that received the standard version of the program, (2) a treatment group that received the adapted version of the program for high sensation-seeking and impulsive youth, or (3) a control group in which schools delivered their standard, non-skills-based HIV prevention curricula. Surveys were administered immediately before the program started at the beginning of the ninth grade (baseline), immediately after the program at the end of the ninth grade, and again a year later at the end of the tenth grade.
For the tenth grade follow-up, the study found that students in the control group were statistically significantly more likely to report having initiated sexual intercourse than students who received either the standard or adapted version of the program (odds ratio = 2.42, confidence interval = 1.54 to 3.80). The study found no statistically significant impacts when analyzing data for the standard and adapted versions of the program separately.
The study also examined program impacts on measures of condom use at last sexual encounter and frequency of condom use. Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they did not meet the review evidence standards. Specifically, findings were reported only for subgroups of youth defined by sexual activity at follow-up.
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.