A school-based randomized controlled trial of peer-led sex education in England

J.M Stephenson M.R.C.P., M.Sc. , A Oakley Ph.D. , A.M Johnson M.R.C.P., M.R.C.G.P. , S Forrest M.A.(Ed), P.G.C.E. , V Strange M.Sc. , S Charleston , S Black P.G.C.E., M.Sc. , A Copas M.Sc., Ph.D. , A Petruckevitch , A Babiker Ph.D.
{"title":"A school-based randomized controlled trial of peer-led sex education in England","authors":"J.M Stephenson M.R.C.P., M.Sc. ,&nbsp;A Oakley Ph.D. ,&nbsp;A.M Johnson M.R.C.P., M.R.C.G.P. ,&nbsp;S Forrest M.A.(Ed), P.G.C.E. ,&nbsp;V Strange M.Sc. ,&nbsp;S Charleston ,&nbsp;S Black P.G.C.E., M.Sc. ,&nbsp;A Copas M.Sc., Ph.D. ,&nbsp;A Petruckevitch ,&nbsp;A Babiker Ph.D.","doi":"10.1016/S0197-2456(03)00070-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article discusses the design of an ongoing cluster-randomized trial comparing two forms of school-based sex education in terms of educational process and sexual health outcomes. Twenty-nine schools in southern England have been randomized to either peer-led sex education or to continue with their traditional teacher-led sex education. The primary objective is to determine which form of sex education is more effective in promoting young people's sexual health. The trial includes an unusually detailed evaluation of the process of sex education as well as the outcomes. The sex education programs were delivered in school to pupils ages 13–14 years who are being followed until ages 19–20. Major trial outcomes are unprotected sexual intercourse and regretted intercourse by age 16 and cumulative incidence of abortion by ages 19–20. We discuss the rationale behind various aspects of the design, including ethical issues and practical challenges of conducting a randomized trial in schools, data linkage for key outcomes to reduce bias, and integrating process and outcome measures to improve the interpretation of findings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72706,"journal":{"name":"Controlled clinical trials","volume":"24 5","pages":"Pages 643-657"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0197-2456(03)00070-9","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Controlled clinical trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0197245603000709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

This article discusses the design of an ongoing cluster-randomized trial comparing two forms of school-based sex education in terms of educational process and sexual health outcomes. Twenty-nine schools in southern England have been randomized to either peer-led sex education or to continue with their traditional teacher-led sex education. The primary objective is to determine which form of sex education is more effective in promoting young people's sexual health. The trial includes an unusually detailed evaluation of the process of sex education as well as the outcomes. The sex education programs were delivered in school to pupils ages 13–14 years who are being followed until ages 19–20. Major trial outcomes are unprotected sexual intercourse and regretted intercourse by age 16 and cumulative incidence of abortion by ages 19–20. We discuss the rationale behind various aspects of the design, including ethical issues and practical challenges of conducting a randomized trial in schools, data linkage for key outcomes to reduce bias, and integrating process and outcome measures to improve the interpretation of findings.

英国一项以学校为基础的随机对照试验——以同伴为主导的性教育
本文讨论了一项正在进行的集群随机试验的设计,比较两种形式的学校性教育在教育过程和性健康结果方面的差异。英格兰南部的29所学校被随机分为两组,一组接受同伴主导的性教育,另一组继续进行传统的教师主导的性教育。主要目标是确定哪种形式的性教育在促进年轻人性健康方面更有效。该试验包括对性教育过程和结果的异常详细的评估。这些性教育课程是在学校对13-14岁的学生进行的,这些学生一直被跟踪到19-20岁。主要试验结果为16岁前无保护性交和后悔性交,以及19-20岁前累计流产率。我们讨论了设计的各个方面背后的基本原理,包括在学校进行随机试验的伦理问题和实际挑战,关键结果的数据链接以减少偏见,以及整合过程和结果措施以改进对结果的解释。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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