Effect of a Community-Based Gender Norms Program on Sexual Violence Perpetration by Adolescent Boys and Young Men: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Elizabeth Miller, Kelley A Jones, Alison J Culyba, Taylor Paglisotti, Namita Dwarakanath, Michael Massof, Zoe Feinstein, Katie A Ports, Dorothy Espelage, Julie Pulerwitz, Aapta Garg, Jane Kato-Wallace, Kaleab Z Abebe, Elizabeth Miller, Kelley A Jones, Alison J Culyba, Taylor Paglisotti, Namita Dwarakanath, Michael Massof, Zoe Feinstein, Katie A Ports, Dorothy Espelage, Julie Pulerwitz, Aapta Garg, Jane Kato-Wallace, Kaleab Z Abebe

Abstract

Importance: Engaging adolescent boys and young men in preventing violence against women is a potentially impactful public health strategy.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a community-based, gender-transformative program (ie, Manhood 2.0) on perpetration of gender-based violence by adolescent boys and young men.

Design, setting, and participants: In this unblinded cluster randomized clinical trial, neighborhoods were designated as the unit of clustering (1:1 allocation). Three-month (ie, time point 2 [T2]) and 9-month (ie, time point 3 [T3]) follow-ups were conducted. The trial took place in 20 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, neighborhoods and 1 centrally located site with concentrated disadvantage. Pittsburgh-based adolescent boys and young men (ages 13 to 19 years) were recruited between July 27, 2015, and June 5, 2017, through youth-serving organizations and community-based alternatives to residential placement for juvenile justice-involved youth. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted from June 2018 to November 2019.

Interventions: Manhood 2.0, an international program adapted for adolescent boys and young men in US urban communities, encourages these individuals to challenge gender norms that foster violence against women and unhealthy sexual relationships. Individuals in the control population received job-readiness training. Each program was 18 hours.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was change in participant-level perpetration of sexual violence (SV) or adolescent relationship abuse (ARA) at T3.

Results: Among 866 participants, 465 individuals (54%) enrolled in 11 intervention clusters and 401 individuals (46%) enrolled in 10 control clusters. In the intervention group, 325 participants (70%) were analyzed at T2 and 334 participants (72%) were analyzed at T3; in the control group, 262 participants (65%) were analyzed at T2 and 301 participants (75%) were analyzed at T3. Mean (SD) age was 15.5 (1.6) years; 609 participants (70%) self-identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 178 (20%) self-identified as Hispanic, multiracial, or other race/ethnicity other than White. Among individuals in the intervention group, 296 participants (64%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at baseline, and 173 participants (52%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at T3. Among individuals in the control group, 213 participants (53%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at baseline, and 124 participants (41%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at T3). The difference in reduction between groups was not significant. There was no evidence of an intervention effect for the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.32; 95% CI, 0.86-2.01; P = .20).

Conclusions and relevance: The findings from this evaluation of a community-based gender-transformative program for adolescent boys and young men did not show a significant intervention effect in reducing SV or ARA perpetration between Manhood 2.0 and a job-readiness control program. Combining gender-transformative approaches with job-readiness programs may be relevant for violence prevention in low-resource urban settings. Attention to improving implementation and strategies to sustain such community-based efforts are needed.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02427061.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Culyba reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of this study. Dr Pulerwitz reported receiving grants from the University of Pittsburgh during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.. Study Participant Recruitment and Retention Flowchart
Figure.. Study Participant Recruitment and Retention Flowchart
T2 indicates time 2 (approximately 3 months after end of program); T3, time 3 (approximately 9 months after end of program); and unmatched codes, unable to match participant-generated secret code.

References

    1. Smith SG, Zhang X, Basile KC, et al. . The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2015 Data Brief–Updated Release. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2018:1-25.
    1. Dick RN, McCauley HL, Jones KA, et al. . Cyber dating abuse among teens using school-based health centers. Pediatrics. 2014;134(6):e1560-e1567. doi:10.1542/peds.2014-0537
    1. Exner-Cortens D, Eckenrode J, Rothman E. Longitudinal associations between teen dating violence victimization and adverse health outcomes. Pediatrics. 2013;131(1):71-78. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-1029
    1. World Health Organization Global and Regional Estimates of Violence Against Women: Prevalence and Health Effects of Intimate Partner Violence and Non-Partner Sexual Violence. World Health Organization; 2013.
    1. DeGue S, Valle LA, Holt MK, Massetti GM, Matjasko JL, Tharp AT. A systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration. Aggress Violent Behav. 2014;19(4):346-362. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2014.05.004
    1. Weber AM, Cislaghi B, Meausoone V, et al. ; Gender Equality, Norms and Health Steering Committee . Gender norms and health: insights from global survey data. Lancet. 2019;393(10189):2455-2468. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30765-2
    1. McCarthy KJ, Mehta R, Haberland NA. Gender, power, and violence: a systematic review of measures and their association with male perpetration of IPV. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):e0207091. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0207091
    1. Casey E, Carlson J, Two Bulls S, Yager A. Gender transformative approaches to engaging men in gender-based violence prevention: a review and conceptual model. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2018;19(2):231-246. doi:10.1177/1524838016650191
    1. Lundgren R, Amin A. Addressing intimate partner violence and sexual violence among adolescents: emerging evidence of effectiveness. J Adolesc Health. 2015;56(1)(suppl):S42-S50. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.08.012
    1. Kato-Wallace J, Barker G, Garg A, et al. . Adapting a global gender-transformative violence prevention program for the U.S. community-based setting for work with young men. Glob Soc Welf. 2019;6(2):121-130. doi:10.1007/s40609-018-00135-y
    1. Abebe KZ, Jones KA, Culyba AJ, et al. . Engendering healthy masculinities to prevent sexual violence: rationale for and design of the Manhood 2.0 trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018;71:18-32. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2018.05.017
    1. Nation M, Crusto C, Wandersman A, et al. . What works in prevention: principles of effective prevention programs. Am Psychol. 2003;58(6-7):449-456. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.449
    1. YouthWorks JumpStart Success: Work Readiness and Career Exploration Training. Accessed November 2, 2020.
    1. Heller SB. Summer jobs reduce violence among disadvantaged youth. Science. 2014;346(6214):1219-1223. doi:10.1126/science.1257809
    1. Johnson SL, Jones V, Cheng T.. Promoting successful transition to adulthood for urban youths: are risk behaviors associated with career readiness? Soc Work Res. 2014;38(3):144-153.
    1. Ripper L, Ciaravino S, Jones K, Jaime MCD, Miller E. Use of a respondent-generated personal code for matching anonymous adolescent surveys in longitudinal studies. J Adolesc Health. 2017;60(6):751-753. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.01.003
    1. Tancredi DJ, Silverman JG, Decker MR, et al. . Cluster randomized controlled trial protocol: Addressing Reproductive Coercion in Health Settings (ARCHES). BMC Womens Health. 2015;15:57. doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0216-z
    1. Miller E, Tancredi DJ, McCauley HL, et al. . “Coaching boys into men”: a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a dating violence prevention program. J Adolesc Health. 2012;51(5):431-438. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.01.018
    1. Espelage DL, Holt MK. Dating violence & sexual harassment across the bully-victim continuum among middle and high school students. J Youth Adolesc. 2007;36(6):799-811. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9109-7
    1. Dartnall E, Jewkes R. Sexual violence against women: the scope of the problem. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27(1):3-13. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2012.08.002
    1. Koss MP, Gidycz CA. Sexual experiences survey: reliability and validity. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1985;53(3):422-423. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.53.3.422
    1. Pulerwitz J, Barker G. Measuring attitudes toward gender norms among young men in Brazil: Development and psychometric evaluation of the GEM scale. Men Masc. 2008;10(3):322-338. doi:10.1177/1097184X06298778
    1. Chu JY, Porche MV, Tolman DL. The adolescent masculinity ideology in relationships scale: development and validation of a new measure for boys. Men Masc. 2005;8(1):93-115. doi:10.1177/1097184X03257453
    1. Rothman EF, Decker MR, Silverman JG. Evaluation of a teen dating violence social marketing campaign: lessons learned when the null hypothesis was accepted. New Dir Eval. 2006;2006(110):33-44. doi:10.1002/ev.185
    1. Brafford LJ, Beck KH. Development and validation of a condom self-efficacy scale for college students. J Am Coll Health. 1991;39(5):219-225. doi:10.1080/07448481.1991.9936238
    1. Cabral RJ, Galavotti C, Stark MJ, et al. . Psychosocial factors associated with stage of change for contraceptive use among women at increased risk for HIV and STDs. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2004;34(5):959-983. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02579.x
    1. Aalsma MC, Carpentier MY, Azzouz F, Fortenberry JD. Longitudinal effects of health-harming and health-protective behaviors within adolescent romantic dyads. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(9):1444-1451. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.01.014
    1. Borrero S, Farkas A, Dehlendorf C, Rocca CH. Racial and ethnic differences in men’s knowledge and attitudes about contraception. Contraception. 2013;88(4):532-538. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2013.04.002
    1. Carvajal DN, Ghazarian SR, Shea Crowne S, et al. . Is depression associated with contraceptive motivations, intentions, and use among a sample of low-income Latinas? Womens Health Issues. 2014;24(1):e105-e113. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2013.10.003
    1. Hemming K, Girling AJ, Sitch AJ, Marsh J, Lilford RJ. Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:102. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-102
    1. Miller E, Tancredi DJ, McCauley HL, et al. . One-year follow-up of a coach-delivered dating violence prevention program: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(1):108-112. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.007

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner