↓ Skip to main content

Do School-Based Programs Prevent HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections in Adolescents? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
Title
Do School-Based Programs Prevent HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections in Adolescents? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Published in
Prevention Science, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11121-017-0830-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ali Mirzazadeh, M. Antonia Biggs, Amanda Viitanen, Hacsi Horvath, Li Yan Wang, Richard Dunville, Lisa C. Barrios, James G. Kahn, Elliot Marseille

Abstract

We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the effectiveness of school-based programs to prevent HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI) among adolescents in the USA. We searched six databases including PubMed for studies published through May 2017. Eligible studies included youth ages 10-19 years and assessed any school-based programs in the USA that reported changes in HIV/STI incidence or testing. We used Cochrane tool to assess the risk of bias and GRADE to determine the evidence quality for each outcome. Three RCTs and six non-RCTs, describing seven interventions, met study inclusion criteria. No study reported changes in HIV incidence or prevalence. One comprehensive intervention, assessed in a non-RCT and delivered to pre-teens, reduced STI incidence into adulthood (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.23-0.56). A non-RCT examining chlamydia and gonorrhea incidence before and after a condom availability program found a significant effect at the city level among young men 3 years later (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.80). The remaining four interventions found no effect. The effect on STI prevalence was also not significant (pooled RR 0.83 from two non-RCTs, RR 0.70 from one RCT). Only one non-RCT showed an increase in HIV testing (RR 3.19, 95% CI 1.24-8.24). The quality of evidence for all outcomes was very low. Studies, including the RCTs, were of low methodological quality and had mixed findings, thus offering no persuasive evidence for the effectiveness of school-based programs. The most effective intervention spanned 6 years, was a social development-based intervention with multiple components, rather than a sex education program, and started in first grade.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 156 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 21%
Student > Bachelor 22 14%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 47 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 17%
Psychology 13 8%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 58 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2019.
All research outputs
#6,991,669
of 24,788,795 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#448
of 1,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,943
of 322,700 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#13
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,788,795 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,700 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.