Effectiveness of an empowerment-based self-defense program among South African girls: results from a cluster-randomized control trial in schools.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Miriam Hartmann, Shepherd Mutangabende, Stephen Nash, Erica N Browne, Abigail Hatcher, Anna E Kågesten, Sarah T Roberts
{"title":"Effectiveness of an empowerment-based self-defense program among South African girls: results from a cluster-randomized control trial in schools.","authors":"Miriam Hartmann, Shepherd Mutangabende, Stephen Nash, Erica N Browne, Abigail Hatcher, Anna E Kågesten, Sarah T Roberts","doi":"10.1186/s12905-025-03647-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Empowerment-based self-defense (ESD) programs have proven effective in preventing sexual violence (SV) among girls in diverse settings, yet their effectiveness in South Africa remains unexplored. In this hybrid type 1 cluster-randomized controlled trial, we assessed the impact and implementation of the COVID-adapted 'No Means No' intervention, an ESD program to prevent SV among girls aged 10-19 in Gqeberha, South Africa. Fifteen schools were randomly assigned to one of three trial arms: an arm receiving intervention delivered to girls-only, one receiving interventions delivered to girls and boys seperately, or to serve as controls in a 1:1:1 ratio. Surveys were conducted at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was past-year SV exposure among girls, including harassment or rape. Generlized Estimating Equation models compared the two intervention arms to the control, and each intervention arm to the control. Implementation data consisted of intervention attendence logs, quarterly implementation reports, and in-depth interviews with school stakeholders. We enrolled 1,540 from 14 schools, of whom 1,250 provided primary outcome data. The average age was 13 years and 83% identified as Black. At baseline, 35% of girls reported past-year SV, and 33% did during follow-up. The intervention did not significantly reduce SV compared to the control (adjRR 1.24, 95% CI 0.96, 1.69; p = 0.08). Exploratory analyses examined the effects on secondary outcomes (rape, offline, and online sexual harassment), and on intermediate outcomes (e.g., knowledge and attitudes) with only knowledge of self-defense differing between intervention and control (coefficient 0.42, 95% CI 0.16, 0.68; p = 0.007). Implementation data revealed barriers to implementing in schools post-COVID, including limitations on alloted time and lack of whole-school buy-in. Improved school awareness, willingness to disclose violence, and reductions in bullying were described as impacts of the intervention by stakeholders. While the lack of reduction in SV may point towards areas for improvement, numerous contextual and implementation factors may also have influenced results. Future trials should utilize implementation science methods to improve delivery and rigorously evaluate ESD interventions' impact on disclosure, acknowledging the complexity of assessing their effects on various facets of SV. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05295342).</p>","PeriodicalId":9204,"journal":{"name":"BMC Women's Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11907951/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Women's Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-025-03647-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Empowerment-based self-defense (ESD) programs have proven effective in preventing sexual violence (SV) among girls in diverse settings, yet their effectiveness in South Africa remains unexplored. In this hybrid type 1 cluster-randomized controlled trial, we assessed the impact and implementation of the COVID-adapted 'No Means No' intervention, an ESD program to prevent SV among girls aged 10-19 in Gqeberha, South Africa. Fifteen schools were randomly assigned to one of three trial arms: an arm receiving intervention delivered to girls-only, one receiving interventions delivered to girls and boys seperately, or to serve as controls in a 1:1:1 ratio. Surveys were conducted at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was past-year SV exposure among girls, including harassment or rape. Generlized Estimating Equation models compared the two intervention arms to the control, and each intervention arm to the control. Implementation data consisted of intervention attendence logs, quarterly implementation reports, and in-depth interviews with school stakeholders. We enrolled 1,540 from 14 schools, of whom 1,250 provided primary outcome data. The average age was 13 years and 83% identified as Black. At baseline, 35% of girls reported past-year SV, and 33% did during follow-up. The intervention did not significantly reduce SV compared to the control (adjRR 1.24, 95% CI 0.96, 1.69; p = 0.08). Exploratory analyses examined the effects on secondary outcomes (rape, offline, and online sexual harassment), and on intermediate outcomes (e.g., knowledge and attitudes) with only knowledge of self-defense differing between intervention and control (coefficient 0.42, 95% CI 0.16, 0.68; p = 0.007). Implementation data revealed barriers to implementing in schools post-COVID, including limitations on alloted time and lack of whole-school buy-in. Improved school awareness, willingness to disclose violence, and reductions in bullying were described as impacts of the intervention by stakeholders. While the lack of reduction in SV may point towards areas for improvement, numerous contextual and implementation factors may also have influenced results. Future trials should utilize implementation science methods to improve delivery and rigorously evaluate ESD interventions' impact on disclosure, acknowledging the complexity of assessing their effects on various facets of SV. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05295342).

以赋权为基础的自卫计划在南非女孩中的效果:学校分组随机对照试验的结果。
基于赋权的自卫(ESD)计划已被证明能在不同环境下有效预防女童遭受性暴力(SV),但其在南非的有效性仍有待探索。在这项混合型 1 类群集随机对照试验中,我们评估了 COVID 改编的 "不意味着不 "干预措施的影响和实施情况,该干预措施是一项可持续发展教育计划,旨在预防南非 Gqeberha 地区 10-19 岁女孩遭受性暴力。15 所学校被随机分配到三个试验组中的一个:接受干预措施的试验组只针对女孩,接受干预措施的试验组分别针对女孩和男孩,或者以 1:1:1 的比例作为对照组。分别在基线期、3 个月、6 个月和 12 个月进行调查。主要结果是女孩在过去一年中遭受 SV 的情况,包括骚扰或强奸。生成估计方程模型比较了两个干预组和对照组,以及每个干预组和对照组。实施数据包括干预参与记录、季度实施报告以及对学校利益相关者的深入访谈。我们从 14 所学校招募了 1,540 人,其中 1,250 人提供了主要结果数据。学生平均年龄为 13 岁,83% 的学生被认定为黑人。在基线调查中,35% 的女孩报告了过去一年的 SV 情况,33% 的女孩在后续调查中报告了这一情况。与对照组相比,干预并未明显降低 SV(adjRR 1.24,95% CI 0.96,1.69;p = 0.08)。探索性分析检查了对次要结果(强奸、线下和线上性骚扰)和中间结果(如知识和态度)的影响,结果显示,只有自我防卫知识在干预和对照之间存在差异(系数 0.42,95% CI 0.16,0.68;p = 0.007)。实施数据显示,COVID 后在学校实施的障碍包括分配的时间有限和缺乏全校参与。利益相关者认为,干预措施的影响包括提高了学校的认识、愿意公开暴力行为以及减少了欺凌行为。虽然 SV 没有减少,但这可能说明了需要改进的地方,许多背景和实施因素也可能影响了结果。未来的试验应利用实施科学方法来改进实施工作,并严格评估可持续发展教育干预措施对信息披露的影响,同时承认评估其对 SV 各方面影响的复杂性。该试验已在 clinicaltrials.gov 上注册(NCT05295342)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Women's Health
BMC Women's Health OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
444
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Women''s Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the health and wellbeing of adolescent girls and women, with a particular focus on the physical, mental, and emotional health of women in developed and developing nations. The journal welcomes submissions on women''s public health issues, health behaviours, breast cancer, gynecological diseases, mental health and health promotion.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信