How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Outros |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10362/108672 |
Resumo: | Background: Complex sexual and reproductive health interventions, such as sexuality education (SE), contain multiple components and activities, which often requires a comprehensive evaluation design and adaptation to a specific context. In this review, we synthetize available scientific literature on types of evaluation designs used for SE programs in low-and lower-middle-income countries. Methods: Two databases yielded 455 publications, from which 20 articles met the inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize the findings. Evaluation approaches were compared to recommended evaluation frameworks. The quality of articles was assessed by using MMAT 2018. Results: A total of 15 interventions employed in 10 countries were evaluated in the 20 selected articles, with the quality of publications being moderate to high. Randomized controlled trial was the predominant study design, followed by quasi-experimental design. There were seven process evaluation studies, using mixed methods. Main outcomes reported were of public health or behavioral nature—condom use, sexual debut or delay, and number of sexual partners. By comparing evaluation designs to recommended frameworks, few studies fulfilled at least half of the criteria. Conclusions: Evaluations of SE are largely dominated by quantitative (quasi-)experimental designs and use of public health outcomes. To improve understanding of SE program effectiveness, it is important to assess the quality of the program development, its implementation, and its impact, using existing evaluation frameworks and recommendations. |
id |
RCAP_7d71a66acb1d3f857df6af6c5549aeee |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:run.unl.pt:10362/108672 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository_id_str |
https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160 |
spelling |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries?a systematic reviewAdolescentComplex interventionEvaluationSexual and reproductive healthSexuality educationSystematic reviewPublic Health, Environmental and Occupational HealthHealth, Toxicology and MutagenesisSDG 3 - Good Health and Well-beingBackground: Complex sexual and reproductive health interventions, such as sexuality education (SE), contain multiple components and activities, which often requires a comprehensive evaluation design and adaptation to a specific context. In this review, we synthetize available scientific literature on types of evaluation designs used for SE programs in low-and lower-middle-income countries. Methods: Two databases yielded 455 publications, from which 20 articles met the inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize the findings. Evaluation approaches were compared to recommended evaluation frameworks. The quality of articles was assessed by using MMAT 2018. Results: A total of 15 interventions employed in 10 countries were evaluated in the 20 selected articles, with the quality of publications being moderate to high. Randomized controlled trial was the predominant study design, followed by quasi-experimental design. There were seven process evaluation studies, using mixed methods. Main outcomes reported were of public health or behavioral nature—condom use, sexual debut or delay, and number of sexual partners. By comparing evaluation designs to recommended frameworks, few studies fulfilled at least half of the criteria. Conclusions: Evaluations of SE are largely dominated by quantitative (quasi-)experimental designs and use of public health outcomes. To improve understanding of SE program effectiveness, it is important to assess the quality of the program development, its implementation, and its impact, using existing evaluation frameworks and recommendations.Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública (ENSP)Comprehensive Health Research Centre (CHRC) - Pólo ENSPCentro de Investigação em Saúde Pública (CISP/PHRC)RUNIvanova, OlenaRai, MasnaMichielsen, KristienDias, Sónia2020-12-15T05:28:42Z2020-11-012020-11-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/other16application/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10362/108672eng1661-7827PURE: 26859002https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218183info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2024-05-22T17:49:15Zoai:run.unl.pt:10362/108672Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T17:20:14.320808Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? a systematic review |
title |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? |
spellingShingle |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? Ivanova, Olena Adolescent Complex intervention Evaluation Sexual and reproductive health Sexuality education Systematic review Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being |
title_short |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? |
title_full |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? |
title_fullStr |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? |
title_full_unstemmed |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? |
title_sort |
How sexuality education programs have been evaluated in low-and lower-middle-income countries? |
author |
Ivanova, Olena |
author_facet |
Ivanova, Olena Rai, Masna Michielsen, Kristien Dias, Sónia |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Rai, Masna Michielsen, Kristien Dias, Sónia |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública (ENSP) Comprehensive Health Research Centre (CHRC) - Pólo ENSP Centro de Investigação em Saúde Pública (CISP/PHRC) RUN |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ivanova, Olena Rai, Masna Michielsen, Kristien Dias, Sónia |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Adolescent Complex intervention Evaluation Sexual and reproductive health Sexuality education Systematic review Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being |
topic |
Adolescent Complex intervention Evaluation Sexual and reproductive health Sexuality education Systematic review Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being |
description |
Background: Complex sexual and reproductive health interventions, such as sexuality education (SE), contain multiple components and activities, which often requires a comprehensive evaluation design and adaptation to a specific context. In this review, we synthetize available scientific literature on types of evaluation designs used for SE programs in low-and lower-middle-income countries. Methods: Two databases yielded 455 publications, from which 20 articles met the inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize the findings. Evaluation approaches were compared to recommended evaluation frameworks. The quality of articles was assessed by using MMAT 2018. Results: A total of 15 interventions employed in 10 countries were evaluated in the 20 selected articles, with the quality of publications being moderate to high. Randomized controlled trial was the predominant study design, followed by quasi-experimental design. There were seven process evaluation studies, using mixed methods. Main outcomes reported were of public health or behavioral nature—condom use, sexual debut or delay, and number of sexual partners. By comparing evaluation designs to recommended frameworks, few studies fulfilled at least half of the criteria. Conclusions: Evaluations of SE are largely dominated by quantitative (quasi-)experimental designs and use of public health outcomes. To improve understanding of SE program effectiveness, it is important to assess the quality of the program development, its implementation, and its impact, using existing evaluation frameworks and recommendations. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-12-15T05:28:42Z 2020-11-01 2020-11-01T00:00:00Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/other |
format |
other |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10362/108672 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10362/108672 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
1661-7827 PURE: 26859002 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218183 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
16 application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
collection |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
info@rcaap.pt |
_version_ |
1833596624859824128 |