Study Details
Citation
Cunningham, M. R., van Zyl, M. A., & Borders, K. W. (2016). Evaluation of Love Notes and reducing the risk in Louisville, Kentucky. Final evaluation report to the University of Louisville Research Foundation, Louisville, KY.
Barbee, A. P., Cunningham, M. R., van Zyl, M. A., Antle, B. F., & Langley, C. N. (2016). Impact of two adolescent pregnancy prevention interventions on risky sexual behavior: A three-arm cluster randomized control trial. American Journal of Public Health, 106, S85–S90. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303429
Barbee, A. P., Cunningham, M. R., Antle, B. F., & Langley, C. N. (2022). Impact of a relationship‐based intervention, Love Notes, on teen pregnancy prevention. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 72(5), 2569–2588. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12798
Program or Component Study?
Program
Program or Component Name
Reducing the Risk
Show Evidence of Effectiveness
Yes
Program Information
Program Type
Sexual health education
Program Length
10 to 20 sessions
Evaluation Setting
Evaluation Setting
After school
Study Sample
Average Age Group
14 to 17
Majority Racial/Ethnic Group
African American or Black
Sex
Male and female youth
Research Design
Assignment Method
Cluster randomized controlled trial
Sample Size
939
Number of Follow-Ups
3
Length of Last Follow-Up
12
Year of Last Data Collection
2015
Study Findings
Result Number of Partners
Result Sexual Activity
Result Contraceptive Use
Result Pregnancy
Reviewed Studies
Moderate-Quality Randomized Trial
Protocol Version
Version 5.0
Details
In a separate recent study, researchers evaluated the standard version of the program when implemented among at-risk youth outside of school as part of a community-based program. The study used a cluster randomized control trial involving 23 community-based organizations in Louisville, Kentucky. Youth were recruited into the study on a rolling basis in small groups. Each group was randomly assigned to one of three research conditions: (1) a treatment group receiving the Reducing the Risk program; (2) a treatment group receiving the Love Notes intervention; or (3) a control group receiving a program on neighborhood assets and community change. Data for the study were collected before the program (baseline), immediately after the program, and at three, six, 12, and 24 months after the end of the program. The manuscripts included in this review focused on data collected at the three-, six-, and 12-month follow-ups.
For the three-month follow-up, the study replicated the favorable impact on sexual initiation found in the earlier studies of the program (effect size = -0.17). In addition, the study found a favorable impact on recent pregnancy at the three-month follow-up (effect size = -0.15). The study also found that at the six-month follow-up, adolescents in the Reducing the Risk group were more likely than those in the control group to report using birth control during sexual intercourse (effect size = -0.24).
The study found no statistically significant impacts at any follow-up on the average number of sexual partners.
The study also examined impacts of Reducing the Risk on negative attitudes about teen pregnancy and the success sequence (the likelihood that youth thought they would order their lives in a conventional way). Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review. Finally, the study examined impacts of Reducing the Risk on a measure of pregnancy (or causing a pregnancy) within the first year after the end of the intervention. Findings for that outcome measure were not considered for the review because they did not meet the review evidence standards. Specifically, the review had concerns about sample composition change, and the analyses of that outcome did not meet the TPPER baseline equivalence requirement.
Effect Sizes
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.