- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04950686
Study of Long-term Efficacy and Mechanisms Underlying the Impact of a Web-based Sexual and Relationship Health Promotion Program With Young Adult Community College Students
The Community College Health Study: A Study of Long-term Efficacy and Mechanisms Underlying the Impact of a Web-based Sexual and Relationship Health Promotion Program With Young Adult Community College Students
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Community college students are an underserved and at-risk population in terms of their sexual and relationship health. One promising avenue for improving sexual decision making among this population is media literacy education (MLE). Though studies show MLE is an effective approach to sexual health promotion there is a need to better understand the mechanisms by which MLE programs impact health outcomes. The ultimate goals of this study are to 1) advance theoretical frameworks of media literacy to better understand the underlying mechanisms that lead to sexual health behavior change and 2) enhance the sexual and relationship health of community college students by identifying successful methods of health promotion and strategies to implement health programs at community colleges. This study is a three-arm randomized control trial (RCT) with 2010 community college students (ages 18-19) from 30 colleges across the U.S. All components of this study (i.e., interventions, surveys) are web-based.
Participating students will be randomized to one of three conditions: 1) students who receive a sexual health program grounded in MLE (Media Aware); 2) students who receive a sexual health program with no MLE; and 3) a wait-list control group. Participants will complete pretest, posttest, 6-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up surveys to examine changes across the three groups in our primary outcomes (e.g., risky sexual behavior) and secondary outcomes (e.g., sexual health knowledge, rape myth acceptance, perceived realism of media messages).
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
North Carolina
-
Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27713
- innovation Research and Training
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Students must be 18 or 19 years of age.
- Students must attend one of the community colleges from which this study is recruiting participants.
- Students must have an email address to receive study communication.
- Students must have access to a computer, tablet, or phone device with internet access as the questionnaires and programs are web-based.
- Students must be able to speak and read English because the study materials (e.g., questionnaires, programs) are in English.
Exclusion Criteria:
-
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Prevention
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Intervention - Media Aware for Young Adults
This arm will receive Media Aware for Young Adults between the pretest and posttest questionnaire.
Media Aware for Young Adults is a web-based sexual and relationship health promotion program that uses a media literacy education (MLE) approach.
The program is self-paced and includes four modules.
|
Media Aware for Young Adults is a web-based sexual and relationship health promotion program designed for young adults that uses a media literacy education (MLE) approach.
|
|
Active Comparator: Active Control - Health Aware for Young Adults
This arm will receive Health Aware for Young Adults in between the pretest and posttest questionnaire.
Health Aware for Young Adults is a web-based sexual and relationship health promotion program.
The program contains the same health content as Media Aware for Young Adults but without the media literacy education components.
The program is self-paced and includes four modules.
|
Media Aware for Young Adults is a web-based sexual and relationship health promotion program designed for young adults.
|
|
No Intervention: Delayed Intervention Control
Participants in this condition will not receive a sexual or relationship health promotion program until after the 12-month follow-up survey.
After that survey is complete, they will receive access to the Media Aware for Young Adults program.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Relationship Satisfaction
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
Relationship satisfaction will be assessed using 7-items (e.g., "How well does your partner meet your needs?") rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (poorly) to 5 (extremely well); higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction; range = 1-5; higher scores indicate a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Relationship Satisfaction
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
Relationship satisfaction will be assessed using 7-items (e.g., "How well does your partner meet your needs?") rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (poorly) to 5 (extremely well); higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction; range = 1-5; higher scores indicate a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Relationship Satisfaction
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
Relationship satisfaction will be assessed using 7-items (e.g., "How well does your partner meet your needs?") rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (poorly) to 5 (extremely well); higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction; range = 1-5; higher scores indicate a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Relationship Violence Perpetration
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
10-items (e.g., "I spoke to my partner in a hostile or mean tone of voice.");
Participants were asked to rate how often these things happened with their current or ex-dating partner on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (often); higher scores indicate more frequent relationship violence; range = 1-4.
[Given lack of variability, this measure was dichotomized so 0 equals no violence and 1 equals any violence.]
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Relationship Violence Perpetration
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
10-items (e.g., "I spoke to my partner in a hostile or mean tone of voice.");
Participants were asked to rate how often these things happened with their current or ex-dating partner on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (often); higher scores indicate more frequent relationship violence; range = 1-4.
[Given lack of variability, this measure was dichotomized so 0 equals no violence and 1 equals any violence.]
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Relationship Violence Perpetration
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
10-items (e.g., "I spoke to my partner in a hostile or mean tone of voice.");
Participants were asked to rate how often these things happened with their current or ex-dating partner on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (often); higher scores indicate more frequent relationship violence; range = 1-4.
[Given lack of variability, this measure was dichotomized so 0 equals no violence and 1 equals any violence.]
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Relationship Violence Victimization
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
10-items (e.g., "My partner spoke to me in a hostile or mean tone of voice"); Participants were asked to rate how often these things happened with their current or ex-dating partner on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (often); higher scores indicate more frequent relationship violence; range = 1-4; [Given lack of variability, this measure was dichotomized so 0 equals no violence and 1 equals any violence.]
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Relationship Violence Victimization
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
10-items (e.g., "My partner spoke to me in a hostile or mean tone of voice"); Participants were asked to rate how often these things happened with their current or ex-dating partner on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (often); higher scores indicate more frequent relationship violence; range = 1-4; [Given lack of variability, this measure was dichotomized so 0 equals no violence and 1 equals any violence.]
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Relationship Violence Victimization
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
10-items (e.g., "My partner spoke to me in a hostile or mean tone of voice"); Participants were asked to rate how often these things happened with their current or ex-dating partner on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (often); higher scores indicate more frequent relationship violence; range = 1-4; [Given lack of variability, this measure was dichotomized so 0 equals no violence and 1 equals any violence.]
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
4-items (e.g., How many times have you had oral, vaginal, or anal sex with a casual partner?);
Participants were asked to report how many times each behavior happened; higher scores indicate greater sexual risk taking.
Responses were open-ended so while the lower limit of the range was assumed to be zero, there was no upper limit imposed on participants.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., How many times have you had oral, vaginal, or anal sex with a casual partner?);
Participants were asked to report how many times each behavior happened; higher scores indicate greater sexual risk taking.
Responses were open-ended so while the lower limit of the range was assumed to be zero, there was no upper limit imposed on participants.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., How many times have you had oral, vaginal, or anal sex with a casual partner?);
Participants were asked to report how many times each behavior happened; higher scores indicate greater sexual risk taking.
Responses were open-ended so while the lower limit of the range was assumed to be zero, there was no upper limit imposed on participants.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used Protection at Last Oral Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ("Did you use a condom and/or dental dam the last time you had oral sex?"); participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had oral sex responded to this item
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used Protection at Last Oral Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Did you use a condom and/or dental dam the last time you had oral sex?"); participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had oral sex responded to this item
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used Protection at Last Oral Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Did you use a condom and/or dental dam the last time you had oral sex?"); participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had oral sex responded to this item
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Use of Protection During Oral Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of use of protection during oral sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom or dental dam when having oral sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent use of protection; Only participants who indicated they had had oral sex responded to these items.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Frequency of Use of Protection During Oral Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of use of protection during oral sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom or dental dam when having oral sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent use of protection; Only participants who indicated they had had oral sex responded to these items.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Use of Protection During Oral Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of use of protection during oral sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom or dental dam when having oral sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent use of protection; Only participants who indicated they had had oral sex responded to these items.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Condom Use During Vaginal Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of condom use during vaginal sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom when having vaginal sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent condom use; Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to these items.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Frequency of Condom Use During Vaginal Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of condom use during vaginal sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom when having vaginal sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent condom use; Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to these items.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Condom Use During Vaginal Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of condom use during vaginal sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom when having vaginal sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent condom use; Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to these items.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Birth Control Use
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of birth control use [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use one of the following forms of birth control?
Birth control pills, The Shot (DepoProvera), The Patch, The Ring (Nuvaring), IUD (Mirena, Paragard, Skyla), The Implant (Implanon, Nexplanon), or other FDA approved methods."];
items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent birth control use; Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to these items.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Frequency of Birth Control Use
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of birth control use [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use one of the following forms of birth control?
Birth control pills, The Shot (DepoProvera), The Patch, The Ring (Nuvaring), IUD (Mirena, Paragard, Skyla), The Implant (Implanon, Nexplanon), or other FDA approved methods."];
items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent birth control use; Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to these items.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Birth Control Use
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of birth control use [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use one of the following forms of birth control?
Birth control pills, The Shot (DepoProvera), The Patch, The Ring (Nuvaring), IUD (Mirena, Paragard, Skyla), The Implant (Implanon, Nexplanon), or other FDA approved methods."];
items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent birth control use; Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to these items.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used Contraceptive at Last Vaginal Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ("Did you use any contraceptive method the last time you had vaginal sex?"); participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to this item
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used Contraceptives at Last Vaginal Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Did you use any contraceptive method the last time you had vaginal sex?"); participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to this item
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used Contraceptives at Last Vaginal Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Did you use any contraceptive method the last time you had vaginal sex?"); participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had vaginal sex responded to this item
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Condom Use During Anal Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of condom use during anal sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom when having anal sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent condom use; Only participants who indicated they had had anal sex responded to these items.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Frequency of Condom Use During Anal Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of condom use during anal sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom when having anal sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent condom use; Only participants who indicated they had had anal sex responded to these items.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Condom Use During Anal Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
3-items used to calculate change in frequency of condom use during anal sex [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you or your partner(s) use a condom when having anal sex?"]; items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always) and averaged for analyses; higher scores indicate more frequent condom use; Only participants who indicated they had had anal sex responded to these items.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used a Condom at Last Anal Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ("Did you use a condom during your last anal intercourse?");
participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had anal sex responded to this item
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used a Condom at Last Anal Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Did you use a condom during your last anal intercourse?");
participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had anal sex responded to this item
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Used a Condom at Last Anal Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Did you use a condom during your last anal intercourse?");
participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0); Only participants who indicated they had had anal sex responded to this item
|
12-month follow-up
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Perceived Realism of Media Messages
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
6-items (e.g., "People my age in the media…have sexual contact as often as average people my age"; rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants think media is more realistic, indicating a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Perceived Realism of Media Messages
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "People my age in the media…have sexual contact as often as average people my age"; rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants think media is more realistic, indicating a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Perceived Realism of Media Messages
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "People my age in the media…have sexual contact as often as average people my age"; rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants think media is more realistic, indicating a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Perceived Similarity to Media Messages
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
7-items (e.g., "The things I do in my life are similar to what I see in the media"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater perceived similarity, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Perceived Similarity to Media Messages
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
7-items (e.g., "The things I do in my life are similar to what I see in the media"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater perceived similarity, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Perceived Similarity to Media Messages
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
7-items (e.g., "The things I do in my life are similar to what I see in the media"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater perceived similarity, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Identification With Media
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
3-items (e.g., "I want to do the things that people my age in the media do"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants identify more with media, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Identification With Media
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
3-items (e.g., "I want to do the things that people my age in the media do"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants identify more with media, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Identification With Media
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
3-items (e.g., "I want to do the things that people my age in the media do"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants identify more with media, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Media Skepticism
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
6-items (e.g., "The media are dishonest about what happens when people drink alcohol"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants have more media skepticism, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Media Skepticism
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "The media are dishonest about what happens when people drink alcohol"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants have more media skepticism, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Media Skepticism
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "The media are dishonest about what happens when people drink alcohol"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate participants have more media skepticism, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Gender Role Norms
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
6-items (e.g., "Raising children is primarily a woman's responsibility"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate more traditional gender role norms, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Gender Role Norms
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "Raising children is primarily a woman's responsibility"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate more traditional gender role norms, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Gender Role Norms
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "Raising children is primarily a woman's responsibility"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate more traditional gender role norms, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Rape Myth Acceptance
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
13-items (e.g., "If a girl is raped while she is drunk, she is at least somewhat responsible for letting things get out of hand"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater rape myth acceptance, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Rape Myth Acceptance
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
13-items (e.g., "If a girl is raped while she is drunk, she is at least somewhat responsible for letting things get out of hand"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater rape myth acceptance, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Rape Myth Acceptance
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
13-items (e.g., "If a girl is raped while she is drunk, she is at least somewhat responsible for letting things get out of hand"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater rape myth acceptance, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
5-items (e.g., "I could talk to a friend who I suspected is in an abusive relationship"); participants rate their confidence that they could do the action on a scale from 0-100; higher scores indicate greater bystander efficacy, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "I could talk to a friend who I suspected is in an abusive relationship"); participants rate their confidence that they could do the action on a scale from 0-100; higher scores indicate greater bystander efficacy, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "I could talk to a friend who I suspected is in an abusive relationship"); participants rate their confidence that they could do the action on a scale from 0-100; higher scores indicate greater bystander efficacy, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Intent to Intervene as Bystander
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
4-items (e.g., "Approach a friend if I thought they were in an abusive relationship and let them know that I am here to help"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to intervene as a bystander, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Intent to Intervene as Bystander
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., "Approach a friend if I thought they were in an abusive relationship and let them know that I am here to help"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to intervene as a bystander, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Intent to Intervene as Bystander
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., "Approach a friend if I thought they were in an abusive relationship and let them know that I am here to help"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to intervene as a bystander, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Sexual Health Knowledge
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
23-items (e.g., "True or False: You can tell if someone has an STI by looking at him/her"); For each item, participants who answer correctly will receive a "1" and participants who answer incorrectly will receive a "0"; items will be summed; higher scores indicate greater sexual health knowledge; range = 0-23 The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Sexual Health Knowledge
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
23-items (e.g., "True or False: You can tell if someone has an STI by looking at him/her"); For each item, participants who answer correctly will receive a "1" and participants who answer incorrectly will receive a "0"; items will be summed; higher scores indicate greater sexual health knowledge; range = 0-23.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Sexual Health Knowledge
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
23-items (e.g., "True or False: You can tell if someone has an STI by looking at him/her"); For each item, participants who answer correctly will receive a "1" and participants who answer incorrectly will receive a "0"; items will be summed; higher scores indicate greater sexual health knowledge; range = 0-23.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
5-items (e.g., "It is okay to…have sex with someone who has had many sexual partners"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Attitudes Toward Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "It is okay to…have sex with someone who has had many sexual partners"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "It is okay to…have sex with someone who has had many sexual partners"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ["It is okay to…have unprotected sex (not including when people are trying to get pregnant)"]; rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards unprotected sex; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Attitudes Toward Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ["It is okay to…have unprotected sex (not including when people are trying to get pregnant)"]; rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards unprotected sex; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ["It is okay to…have unprotected sex (not including when people are trying to get pregnant)"]; rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards unprotected sex; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Contraception/Protection
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
9-items (e.g., "It is wrong to use birth control"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate more favorable attitudes towards contraception; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Attitudes Toward Contraception/Protection
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
9-items (e.g., "It is wrong to use birth control"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate more favorable attitudes towards contraception; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Contraception/Protection
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
9-items (e.g., "It is wrong to use birth control"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate more favorable attitudes towards contraception; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Communication With Partners and Medical Professionals
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
4-items (e.g., "Before deciding to have sex, people should…talk with their partner about HIV/AIDS and other STIs"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards communication, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Attitudes Toward Communication With Partners and Medical Professionals
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., "Before deciding to have sex, people should…talk with their partner about HIV/AIDS and other STIs"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards communication, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Attitudes Toward Communication With Partners and Medical Professionals
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., "Before deciding to have sex, people should…talk with their partner about HIV/AIDS and other STIs"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate positive attitudes towards communication, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Descriptive Norms of Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item (e.g., "What percentage of people your age have had unprotected sex?"); participants write in their estimate of what percentage of their peers are engaging in the behavior; higher scores indicate participants think more of their peers are engaging in unprotected sex; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Descriptive Norms of Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "What percentage of people your age have had unprotected sex?"); participants write in their estimate of what percentage of their peers are engaging in the behavior; higher scores indicate participants think more of their peers are engaging in unprotected sex; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Descriptive Norms of Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "What percentage of people your age have had unprotected sex?"); participants write in their estimate of what percentage of their peers are engaging in the behavior; higher scores indicate participants think more of their peers are engaging in unprotected sex; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Descriptive Norms of Risky Sexual Activity
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
5-items (e.g., "What percentage of people your age…have had oral, anal, or vaginal sex with someone who has not been tested for STIs or whose STI status is unknown?");
participants write in their estimate of what percentage of their peers are engaging in each behavior; higher scores indicate participants think more of their peers are engaging in risky contraception use/protection practices; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Descriptive Norms of Risky Sexual Activity
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "What percentage of people your age…have had oral, anal, or vaginal sex with someone who has not been tested for STIs or whose STI status is unknown?");
participants write in their estimate of what percentage of their peers are engaging in each behavior; higher scores indicate participants think more of their peers are engaging in risky contraception use/protection practices; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Descriptive Norms of Risky Sexual Activity
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "What percentage of people your age…have had oral, anal, or vaginal sex with someone who has not been tested for STIs or whose STI status is unknown?");
participants write in their estimate of what percentage of their peers are engaging in each behavior; higher scores indicate participants think more of their peers are engaging in risky contraception use/protection practices; range = 0-100.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Sex Refusal Self-efficacy
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
5-items (e.g., "I can easily say 'no' to someone who is pressuring me to have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater sex refusal self-efficacy, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Sex Refusal Self-efficacy
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "I can easily say 'no' to someone who is pressuring me to have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater sex refusal self-efficacy, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Sex Refusal Self-efficacy
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "I can easily say 'no' to someone who is pressuring me to have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater sex refusal self-efficacy, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Refuse Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ("I can easily say 'no' to sex if we do not have protection even if I really want to have sex with that person"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to refuse unprotected sex, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Self-efficacy to Refuse Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ("I can easily say 'no' to sex if we do not have protection even if I really want to have sex with that person"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to refuse unprotected sex, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Refuse Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ("I can easily say 'no' to sex if we do not have protection even if I really want to have sex with that person"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to refuse unprotected sex, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Use a Condom
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item (e.g., "I can use a condom correctly or explain to my partner how to use a condom correctly"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to use a condom, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Self-efficacy to Use a Condom
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "I can use a condom correctly or explain to my partner how to use a condom correctly"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to use a condom, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Use a Condom
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "I can use a condom correctly or explain to my partner how to use a condom correctly"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to use a condom, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Communicate With Partners and Medical Professionals About Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
4-items (e.g., "I can discuss preventing STIs with my partner"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to communicate, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Self-efficacy to Communicate With Partners and Medical Professionals About Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., "I can discuss preventing STIs with my partner"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to communicate, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Communicate With Partners and Medical Professionals About Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
4-items (e.g., "I can discuss preventing STIs with my partner"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to communicate, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Risky Sexual Behavior Intentions
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
5-items (e.g., "In the next 6 months, how likely is it that you will have oral, anal, or vaginal sex with a casual partner"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to engage in risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Risky Sexual Behavior Intentions
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "In the next 6 months, how likely is it that you will have oral, anal, or vaginal sex with a casual partner"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to engage in risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Risky Sexual Behavior Intentions
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "In the next 6 months, how likely is it that you will have oral, anal, or vaginal sex with a casual partner"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to engage in risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Intentions to Have Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ("In the next 6 months, how likely is it that you will…have unprotected sex?"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to have unprotected sex, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Intentions to Have Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ("In the next 6 months, how likely is it that you will…have unprotected sex?"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to have unprotected sex, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Intentions to Have Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ("In the next 6 months, how likely is it that you will…have unprotected sex?"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to have unprotected sex, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Intentions to Use a Condom
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item (e.g., "If you were to decide to have sexual intercourse in the next 6 months, how likely would you be to use a condom?");
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to use protection/contraception, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Intentions to Use a Condom
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "If you were to decide to have sexual intercourse in the next 6 months, how likely would you be to use a condom?");
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to use protection/contraception, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Intentions to Use a Condom
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "If you were to decide to have sexual intercourse in the next 6 months, how likely would you be to use a condom?");
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to use protection/contraception, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Intentions to Communicate With Partners and Medical Professionals About Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
6-items (e.g., "If you were to decide to engage in sexual activity with a new partner in the next 6 months, how likely would you be to…talk with a partner about HIV/AIDS or other STIs?"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to communicate, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Intentions to Communicate With Partners and Medical Professionals About Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "If you were to decide to engage in sexual activity with a new partner in the next 6 months, how likely would you be to…talk with a partner about HIV/AIDS or other STIs?"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to communicate, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Intentions to Communicate With Partners and Medical Professionals About Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
6-items (e.g., "If you were to decide to engage in sexual activity with a new partner in the next 6 months, how likely would you be to…talk with a partner about HIV/AIDS or other STIs?"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (not at all likely) to 4 (extremely likely); higher scores indicate greater intentions to communicate, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Willingness to Have Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item (e.g., "Suppose you were with your boyfriend/girlfriend/partner.
He/she wants to have sex, but neither of you have any form of protection.
In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and have sex anyway?";);
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing); higher scores indicate greater willingness to have unprotected sex, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Willingness to Have Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "Suppose you were with your boyfriend/girlfriend/partner.
He/she wants to have sex, but neither of you have any form of protection.
In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and have sex anyway?";);
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing); higher scores indicate greater willingness to have unprotected sex, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Willingness to Have Unprotected Sex
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "Suppose you were with your boyfriend/girlfriend/partner.
He/she wants to have sex, but neither of you have any form of protection.
In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and have sex anyway?";);
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing); higher scores indicate greater willingness to have unprotected sex, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Willingness to Engage in Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
5-items (e.g., "Suppose you wanted to have sex with someone but you did not know their STI status.
In this situation, how willing would you be to have sex anyway?");
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing); higher scores indicate greater willingness to engage in risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Willingness to Engage in Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "Suppose you wanted to have sex with someone but you did not know their STI status.
In this situation, how willing would you be to have sex anyway?");
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing); higher scores indicate greater willingness to engage in risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Willingness to Engage in Risky Sexual Behaviors
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
5-items (e.g., "Suppose you wanted to have sex with someone but you did not know their STI status.
In this situation, how willing would you be to have sex anyway?");
rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing); higher scores indicate greater willingness to engage in risky sexual behaviors, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Advertisement Deconstruction Skills
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to describe it in detail including noting marketing strategies and any missing information (e.g., How are advertisers trying to get someone to buy this product?).
Qualitative responses to the questions are coded by trained project staff members once inter-coder reliability is established, and scores represent the extent to which participants identify the implied message of the advertisement.
Range: 0-3.
Higher scores indicate a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Injunctive Norms - Most People
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
3-items (e.g., "Most people believe that it is okay for people my age to have unprotected sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate riskier injunctive norms, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Injunctive Norms - Most People
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
3-items (e.g., "Most people believe that it is okay for people my age to have unprotected sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate riskier injunctive norms, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Injunctive Norms - Most People
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
3-items (e.g., "Most people believe that it is okay for people my age to have unprotected sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate riskier injunctive norms, which is a less favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Injunctive Norms - Friends
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1 item ("My friends think I should use protection when I have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores less risky injunctive norms, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Injunctive Norms - Friends
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1 item ("My friends think I should use protection when I have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores less risky injunctive norms, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Injunctive Norms - Friends
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1 item ("My friends think I should use protection when I have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores less risky injunctive norms, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Descriptive Norms - People Like me
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item ("Most people like me use protection when they have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores less risky descriptive norms, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Descriptive Norms - People Like me
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Most people like me use protection when they have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores less risky descriptive norms, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Descriptive Norms - People Like me
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1-item ("Most people like me use protection when they have sex"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores less risky descriptive norms, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Communication With Sexual Partner
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1 item used to calculate change in frequency of sexual communication with a partner(s) [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you talk to your partner(s) about using condoms and/or other forms of contraception before engaging in sexual activity?"];
items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always); higher scores indicate more frequent communication, which is a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Frequency of Communication With Sexual Partner
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1 item used to calculate change in frequency of sexual communication with a partner(s) [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you talk to your partner(s) about using condoms and/or other forms of contraception before engaging in sexual activity?"];
items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always); higher scores indicate more frequent communication, which is a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Frequency of Communication With Sexual Partner
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1 item used to calculate change in frequency of sexual communication with a partner(s) [e.g., "In the past month, how often did you talk to your partner(s) about using condoms and/or other forms of contraception before engaging in sexual activity?"];
items rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always); higher scores indicate more frequent communication, which is a more favorable outcome.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Communicated With a Doctor
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item used to calculate change in whether participants communicated with a doctor about sex ["In the past month, had you talked to a doctor or other medical professional about sex, contraception, and/or relationships?"]; participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0)
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Communicated With a Doctor
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
1-item used to calculate change in whether participants communicated with a doctor about sex ["In the past month, had you talked to a doctor or other medical professional about sex, contraception, and/or relationships?"]; participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0)
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
Percentage of Participants That Communicated With a Doctor
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up
|
1 item used to calculate change in whether participants communicated with a doctor about sex ["In the past month, had you talked to a doctor or other medical professional about sex, contraception, and/or relationships?"]; participants answered "yes" (1) or "no" (0)
|
12-month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Use a Dental Dam
Time Frame: posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
1-item (e.g., "I can use a dental dam correctly or explain to my partner how to use a dental dam correctly"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to use a dental dam, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
posttest (4-weeks after pretest)
|
|
Self-efficacy to Use a Dental Dam
Time Frame: 6 month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "I can use a dental dam correctly or explain to my partner how to use a dental dam correctly"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to use a dental dam, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
6 month follow-up
|
|
Self-efficacy to Use a Dental Dam
Time Frame: 12 month follow-up
|
1-item (e.g., "I can use a dental dam correctly or explain to my partner how to use a dental dam correctly"); rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy to use a dental dam, which is a more favorable outcome; range = 1-4.
The overall number of participants analyzed in each Arm/Group includes all participants who completed pretest.
Posttest data was imputed for participants that were present at pretest but not at posttest.
|
12 month follow-up
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Tracy M Scull, PhD, innovation Research and Training
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- CCHealthStudy-R01-20-007
- R01HD099134 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Sexual Behavior
-
Universitat Jaume IMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación, SpainCompletedSexual Compulsive Behavior Disorder | Cybersex Addiction | Online Compulsive Sexual BehaviorSpain
-
Universitat Jaume ICompletedSexual Compulsive Behavior Disorder | Cybersex Addiction | Online Compulsive Sexual BehaviorSpain
-
Medstar Health Research InstituteSHE FoundationCompletedSexual Behavior | Sexual ActivityUnited States
-
Radicle ScienceCompletedSexual Function | Sexual SatisfactionUnited States
-
Universidad Europea de MadridApoyo PositivoCompletedHypersexuality | Compulsive Sexual Behavior | Sexualized Drug Use (Chemsex)Spain
-
Université de Reims Champagne-ArdenneCompletedSexual IntercourseFrance
-
Children's Mercy Hospital Kansas CityEnrolling by invitationEvaluating the Impact of CHOICE-AYA on Contraceptive Use, Continuation and Satisfaction (CHOICE-AYA)Sexual Behavior | Contraception Behavior | Reproductive BehaviorUnited States
-
Child TrendsUniversity of California, San Francisco; Power to DecideRecruiting
-
Montana State UniversityNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD); Northern... and other collaboratorsCompletedSexual Behavior | Reproductive BehaviorUnited States
-
University of California, San DiegoCenters for Disease Control and Prevention; California Department of Public...Enrolling by invitationSexual Violence | Adolescent Behavior | Sexual AssaultUnited States
Clinical Trials on Media Aware for Young Adults
-
Innovation Research & TrainingCompletedSexual BehaviorUnited States
-
Innovation Research & TrainingCompleted
-
Landspitali University HospitalUniversity of Iceland; University College Cork; European Commission; University... and other collaboratorsUnknownOverweight | Bone Resorption | Metabolic Syndrome X
-
Innovation Research & TrainingEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development...Completed
-
Virginia Commonwealth UniversityNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)CompletedObesityUnited States
-
Innovation Research & TrainingEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development...CompletedCommunication | Parent-Child Relations | ParentingUnited States
-
Temple UniversityNational Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)Completed
-
University of HoustonRecruitingMental DisorderUnited States
-
Massachusetts General HospitalCompletedType 1 Diabetes | Type 2 DiabetesUnited States
-
Aarhus University HospitalUppsala UniversityRecruiting