Promoting Adolescent Healthy Relationships (The About Us Program): Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial

Pamela Anderson, Karin Coyle, Stephanie Guinosso, John L Ferrand, Arthur Owora, Rebecca F Houghton, Eric Walsh-Buhi, Pamela Anderson, Karin Coyle, Stephanie Guinosso, John L Ferrand, Arthur Owora, Rebecca F Houghton, Eric Walsh-Buhi

Abstract

Background: Romantic relationships play a critical role in adolescent development, and by middle adolescence, most young people have been involved in at least one romantic relationship, a context in which most sexual interactions occur. Research suggests adolescents lack positive models and skills related to building healthy relationships.

Objective: This project aims to test the impact of an innovative healthy relationships intervention, called About Us, implemented in school-based health centers (SBHCs) in California in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods: About Us is being tested using a 7-site, 2-group, parallel randomized controlled trial with a treatment versus control allocation ratio of 3:2 to assess the impact of the intervention relative to the standard of care among adolescents aged 14 to 18 years. Adolescents with active parental consent provide study assent at each of the 3 survey time points: baseline, 3 months postintervention, and 9 months postintervention. A stratified randomization procedure was used to ensure balance in key covariates and screening criteria across intervention groups. Through benchmark intent-to-treat analyses, we will examine the primary outcome of this study-the impact of About Us relative to the standard of care 9 months following the end of the intervention on the prevalence of vaginal or anal sex without condoms in the past 3 months. The secondary outcomes are four-fold: what is the impact of About Us relative to the standard of care 3 and 9 months following the end of the intervention, on (1) the prevalence of abstinence from vaginal or anal sex in the past 3 months, (2) composite scores of relationship communication and positive conflict resolution among participants involved in a relationship at baseline, (3) the prevalence of SBHC service use or information receipt in the past 3 months, and (4) composite scores of condom use intentions and attitudes regarding condoms and other birth control? Additionally, as part of our sensitivity analyses, two additional analyses will be implemented: modified intent-to-treat and complete case analysis.

Results: This project (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT03736876) was funded in 2016 through the Family Youth Services Bureau as part of the Personal Responsibility Education Innovative Strategies program. Baseline data collection took place between February 2018 and March 2020, yielding a total of 5 cohorts and 533 study participants: 316 assigned to treatment and 217 assigned to control. Ongoing follow-up data collection continued through May 2021.

Conclusions: About Us draws on developmental science to create a contextually and developmentally relevant program that addresses motivation and emotional influences in sexual decision-making. The intervention was designed for implementation within SBHCs, an understudied venue for relationship and sexual health promotion interventions. Unfortunately, COVID-19 pandemic restrictions led to school closures, interrupting ongoing programming, and in-person follow-up data collection, which has affected study attrition.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03736876; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT03736876.

International registered report identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/30499.

Keywords: adolescents; healthy relationships; randomized controlled trial; school-based health center; sexual health education; sexually transmitted diseases; sexually transmitted infections; teen pregnancy; teens; unintended pregnancy; youth.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Pamela Anderson, Karin Coyle, Stephanie Guinosso, John L Ferrand, Arthur Owora, Rebecca F Houghton, Eric Walsh-Buhi. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 01.09.2021.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT diagram for the About Us evaluation (as of October 2020).

References

    1. Feiring C. Other-sex friendship networks and the development of romantic relationships in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 1999 Aug;28(4):495–512. doi: 10.1023/a:1021621108890.
    1. Carver K, Joyner K, Udry J. Florsheim P, editor. National Estimates of Adolescent Romantic Relationships Internet Mahwah, N. J. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003. [2021-01-13]. Adolescent Romantic Relations and Sexual Behavior: Theory, Research and Practical Implications.
    1. Manning WD, Longmore MA, Copp J, Giordano PC. The complexities of adolescent dating and sexual relationships: fluidity, meaning(s), and implications for young adults' well-being. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev. 2014;2014(144):53–69. doi: 10.1002/cad.20060.
    1. Manning W, Giordano P, Longmore M. Hooking up: The relationship contexts of "nonrelationship" sex. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2006;21(5):459–483. doi: 10.1177/0743558406291692.
    1. Coyle K, Guinosso S, Glassman J, Anderson P, Wilson H. Exposure to violence and sexual risk among early adolescents in urban middle schools. The Journal of Early Adolescence. 2017;37(7):889–909. doi: 10.1177/0272431616642324. doi: 10.1177/0272431616642324.
    1. Collins W, van Dulmen M. Romance and Sex in Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood: Risks and Opportunities. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2006. 'The Course of True Love(s)...': Origins and Pathways in the Development of Romantic Relationships; pp. 63–86.
    1. Buhi ER, Goodson P. Predictors of adolescent sexual behavior and intention: a theory-guided systematic review. J Adolesc Health. 2007 Jan;40(1):4–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.09.027.S1054-139X(06)00383-1
    1. Bouchey H, Furman W. Blackwell Handbook of Adolescence. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers; 2006. Dating and Romantic Experiences in Adolescence; pp. 312–329.
    1. Martin J, Hamilton B, Osterman M, Driscoll A. National Vital Statistics Reports; vol 68, no 13. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2019. [2021-03-08]. Births: Final data for 2018. .
    1. Unintended Pregnancy in the United States [Fact Sheet] Guttmacher Institute. 2019. Jan, [2021-01-14]. .
    1. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011. N Engl J Med. 2016 Mar 03;374(9):843–52. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1506575.
    1. Hamilton BE, Rossen LM, Branum AM. Teen birth rates for urban and rural areas in the United States, 2007-2015. NCHS Data Brief. 2016 Nov;(264):1–8.
    1. Lugo-Gil J, Lee A, Vohra D, Harding J, Ochoa L, Goesling B. Updated findings from the HHS Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review: August 2015 through October 2016. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. 2018. Apr, [2021-01-13]. .
    1. Goesling B. ASPE Research Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Human Services Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 2015. May 12, [2021-01-14]. Making Sense of Replication Studies: Guidance for Teen Pregnancy Prevention Researchers. .
    1. Wilson HW, Woods BA, Emerson E, Donenberg GR. Patterns of violence exposure and sexual risk in low-income, urban African American girls. Psychol Violence. 2012 Apr;2(2):194–207. doi: 10.1037/a0027265.
    1. Finkelhor D, Turner H, Ormrod R, Hamby SL. Violence, abuse, and crime exposure in a national sample of children and youth. Pediatrics. 2009 Nov;124(5):1411–23. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-0467.peds.2009-0467
    1. Program Success Center for Sexual & Reproductive Health. Scotts Valley, CA: ETR; [2021-01-14]. Reducing the Risk.
    1. Program Success Center Internet. Scotts Valley, CA: ETR; [2021-01-14]. Making Proud Choices!
    1. About. Seventeen Days. [2014-01-14].
    1. Services Provided by SBHCs. California School-Based Health Alliance. 2011. [2021-01-13].
    1. Brown M, Bolen L. The school-based health center as a resource for prevention and health promotion. Psychology in the Schools. 2008;45(1):28–38. doi: 10.1002/pits.20276. doi: 10.1002/pits.20276.
    1. Damon W. What is positive youth development? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2016 Sep 08;591(1):13–24. doi: 10.1177/0002716203260092.
    1. Collins W. More than myth: The developmental significance of romantic relationships during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2003;13(1):1–24. doi: 10.1111/1532-7795.1301001. doi: 10.1111/1532-7795.1301001.
    1. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: A fuzzy-trace model. Dev Rev. 2011 Sep;31(2-3):180–206. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.004.
    1. Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. 1st edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1985.
    1. Marseille Elliot, Mirzazadeh Ali, Biggs M Antonia, P Miller Amanda, Horvath Hacsi, Lightfoot Marguerita, Malekinejad Mohsen, Kahn James G. Effectiveness of school-based teen pregnancy prevention programs in the USA: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Sci. 2018 May;19(4):468–489. doi: 10.1007/s11121-017-0861-6.10.1007/s11121-017-0861-6
    1. Goesling Brian, Colman Silvie, Trenholm Christopher, Terzian Mary, Moore Kristin. Programs to reduce teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, and associated sexual risk behaviors: a systematic review. J Adolesc Health. 2014 May;54(5):499–507. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.12.004.S1054-139X(13)00798-2
    1. Qualtrics. Provo, Utah, USA: Qualtrics; 2020. [2021-01-14].
    1. Zheng G, Oksuzyan S, Hsu S, Cloud J, Jewell MP, Shah N, Smith LV, Frye D, Kuo T. Self-reported interest to participate in a health survey if different amounts of cash or non-monetary incentive types were offered. J Urban Health. 2018 Dec;95(6):837–849. doi: 10.1007/s11524-018-0237-7. 10.1007/s11524-018-0237-7
    1. Taylor BG, Mumford EA. A national descriptive portrait of adolescent relationship abuse: Results from the national survey on teen relationships and intimate violence. J Interpers Violence. 2016 Mar;31(6):963–88. doi: 10.1177/0886260514564070.0886260514564070
    1. Arellano C, Markman H. The managing affect and differences scale (MADS): A self-report measure assessing conflict management in couples. Journal of Family Psychology. 1995 Sep;9(3):319–334. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.9.3.319.
    1. Cleland J. Illustrative Questionnaire for Interview-Surveys with Young People. World Health Organization. 2001. [2021-05-13]. .
    1. Escribano S, Espada JP, Orgilés Mireia, Morales A. Implementation fidelity for promoting the effectiveness of an adolescent sexual health program. Eval Program Plann. 2016 Dec;59:81–87. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.08.008.S0149-7189(15)30076-8
    1. Starosta AJ, Berghoff CR, Earleywine M. Factor structure and gender stability in the multidimensional condom attitudes scale. Assessment. 2015 Jun 18;22(3):374–84. doi: 10.1177/1073191114547887.1073191114547887
    1. Kyes K. Contraceptive attitude scale. In: Davis C, Yarber W, Bauserman R, Schreer G, Davis S, editors. Handbook of Sexuality-related Measures. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc; 1998. pp. 164–165.
    1. Prep Studies of Performance Measures and Adults Preparation Subjects. Core Measures for PREIS Grantees' Local Evaluations. 2016. [2021-08-03]. .
    1. Wellman RJ, O'Loughlin J. Data dilemmas and difficult decisions: on dealing with inconsistencies in self-reports. J Adolesc Health. 2015 Apr;56(4):365–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.01.015.S1054-139X(15)00034-8
    1. Box G, Cox D. An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 2018 Dec 05;26(2):211–243. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1964.tb00553.x.
    1. Breslow NE, Clayton DG. Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1993 Mar;88(421):9. doi: 10.2307/2290687.
    1. McCullagh P, Nelder J. Generalized Linear Models. Second Edition. London: Chapman and Hall; 1989.
    1. Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika. 1976 Dec;63(3):581. doi: 10.2307/2335739.
    1. Rubin D. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1987.
    1. Sullivan TR, White IR, Salter AB, Ryan P, Lee KJ. Should multiple imputation be the method of choice for handling missing data in randomized trials? Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Sep;27(9):2610–2626. doi: 10.1177/0962280216683570.
    1. van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. mice: multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. J. Stat. Soft. 2011;45(3):1–67. doi: 10.18637/jss.v045.i03.
    1. van Buuren S. Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007 Jun;16(3):219–42. doi: 10.1177/0962280206074463.16/3/219
    1. van Buuren S, Brand JP, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Rubin DB. Fully conditional specification in multivariate imputation. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation. 2006 Dec;76(12):1049–1064. doi: 10.1080/10629360600810434.
    1. von Hippel PT. How many imputations do you need? a two-stage calculation using a quadratic rule. Sociological Methods & Research. 2018 Jan 18;49(3):699–718. doi: 10.1177/0049124117747303.
    1. Coyle K, Anderson P, Laris B. Schools and sexuality education. In: Ponzetti J, editor. Evidence-based Approaches to Sexuality Education: A Global Perspective. 1st Edition. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group; 2016.
    1. Kirby D, Laris B. Effective curriculum-based sex and STD/HIV education programs for adolescents. Child Development Perspectives. 2009;3(1):21–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00071.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00071.x.
    1. Halpern-Felsher B. Adolescent Decision-Making. In: Bradford B, Prinstein M, editors. Encyclopedia of Adolescence. New York, NY: Elsevier Academic Press; 2011. pp. 30–37.
    1. Ballonoff Suleiman A, Brindis CD. Adolescent school-based sex education: using developmental neuroscience to guide new directions for policy and practice. Sex Res Soc Policy. 2014 Feb 14;11(2):137–152. doi: 10.1007/s13178-014-0147-8.
    1. Draper S, Brown M. Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2004;20(2):81–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00074.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00074.x.
    1. Hsu J. The secrets of storytelling. Sci Am Mind. 2008 Aug;19(4):46–51. doi: 10.1038/scientificamericanmind0808-46.
    1. Immordino-Yang M, Damasio A. We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2007;1(1):3–10. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-228x.2007.00004.x.
    1. Dziuban C, Harmtan J, Moskal P. Blended learning. Educause. 2004. [2021-01-14]. .
    1. Lightfoot M, Comulada WS, Stover G. Computerized HIV preventive intervention for adolescents: indications of efficacy. Am J Public Health. 2007 Jun;97(6):1027–30. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.072652.AJPH.2005.072652
    1. Tortolero SR, Markham CM, Peskin MF, Shegog R, Addy RC, Escobar-Chaves SL, Baumler ER. It's your game: keep it real: delaying sexual behavior with an effective middle school program. J Adolesc Health. 2010 Feb;46(2):169–79. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.06.008. S1054-139X(09)00247-X
    1. Riva G, Mantovani F, Capideville CS, Preziosa A, Morganti F, Villani D, Gaggioli A, Botella C, Alcañiz Mariano. Affective interactions using virtual reality: the link between presence and emotions. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2007 Feb;10(1):45–56. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9993.
    1. Rodgers P. Maximizing the Return of Parent Consent Forms. American Foundation for Suicide Prevention; 2006. [2021-08-03].
    1. Fletcher AC, Hunter AG. Strategies for obtaining parental consent to participate in research. Family Relations. 2003 Jul;52(3):216–221. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00216.x.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren