Single and Multi-message Sexuality Education: Improving Implementation and Evaluation of Group-based Programs

IF 0.5 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Behavior and Policy Review Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.14485/hbpr.8.3.4
Lisa A. Rue, Michael Floren, Kiley Floren, Galena K. Rhoades, E. Walker, J. Owen
{"title":"Single and Multi-message Sexuality Education: Improving Implementation and Evaluation of Group-based Programs","authors":"Lisa A. Rue, Michael Floren, Kiley Floren, Galena K. Rhoades, E. Walker, J. Owen","doi":"10.14485/hbpr.8.3.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In this study, we isolated primary messaging strategies of sexuality education curricula to improve tailored delivery of group-based interventions. Specifically, our aim was to define single-message programs (eg, messaging about avoiding sexual risk or messaging about reducing sexual risk) and multiple-message programs (eg, avoiding sexual risk and reducing sexual risk), and to investigate their comparative effectiveness. Methods: We used a descriptive approach with publicly available data from US Department of Health and Human Services-funded teen pregnancy prevention programs to categorize 16 different curricula as single-message or multiple-message. We coded primary messages using a curriculum mapping rubric and scoring that was evaluated by a panel of experts for content validity. Forest plots compared behavioral outcomes. Results: Scores for primary messages achieved inter-rater reliability of 91%-100%; curricula were scored on 20 items within each category to calculate mean scores. Spearman correlations for items ranged from .43 to .93. Conclusions: No outcome differences were observed between single- or multi-message programs. Effective delivery of primary messaging may rely more on identifying moderators of classroom climate typically underrepresented in evaluations of school-based programs.","PeriodicalId":44486,"journal":{"name":"Health Behavior and Policy Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Behavior and Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14485/hbpr.8.3.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: In this study, we isolated primary messaging strategies of sexuality education curricula to improve tailored delivery of group-based interventions. Specifically, our aim was to define single-message programs (eg, messaging about avoiding sexual risk or messaging about reducing sexual risk) and multiple-message programs (eg, avoiding sexual risk and reducing sexual risk), and to investigate their comparative effectiveness. Methods: We used a descriptive approach with publicly available data from US Department of Health and Human Services-funded teen pregnancy prevention programs to categorize 16 different curricula as single-message or multiple-message. We coded primary messages using a curriculum mapping rubric and scoring that was evaluated by a panel of experts for content validity. Forest plots compared behavioral outcomes. Results: Scores for primary messages achieved inter-rater reliability of 91%-100%; curricula were scored on 20 items within each category to calculate mean scores. Spearman correlations for items ranged from .43 to .93. Conclusions: No outcome differences were observed between single- or multi-message programs. Effective delivery of primary messaging may rely more on identifying moderators of classroom climate typically underrepresented in evaluations of school-based programs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
单一和多信息性教育:改进基于群体的项目的实施和评估
目的:在本研究中,我们分离了性教育课程的主要信息传递策略,以改进基于群体的干预措施的定制交付。具体来说,我们的目的是定义单信息项目(例如,关于避免性风险或减少性风险的信息)和多信息项目(例如,避免性风险和减少性风险),并调查它们的相对有效性。方法:我们采用描述性方法,从美国卫生和人类服务部资助的青少年怀孕预防项目中公开获得数据,将16种不同的课程分为单信息或多信息。我们使用课程映射规则编码主要信息,并由专家小组对内容有效性进行评估。森林图比较行为结果。结果:主要信息的评分达到了91%-100%的信度;课程在每个类别中的20个项目上进行评分,以计算平均分数。斯皮尔曼相关性在0.43到0.93之间。结论:在单消息和多消息程序之间没有观察到结果差异。有效地传递主要信息可能更多地依赖于确定课堂气氛的调节者,这些调节者通常在校本项目的评估中代表性不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Behavior and Policy Review
Health Behavior and Policy Review PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Internalized Homonegativity is Indirectly Associated with Smoking Status through Somatic Anxiety. Trauma Informed Care Can Enhance Whole Person Care to Meet the Quadruple Aim Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening among Sub-Saharan African Immigrant Women in the United States: A Qualitative Report Socioeconomic Factors, Movement Behavior Context, and Self-reported Physical and Mental Health in Adults Living in New York City Exploring the Common Factors that Influence Physical Activity, Academic Self-efficacy, and Depression among Junior High School Students: A Literature Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1