Impacts of abstinence education on teen sexual activity, risk of pregnancy, and risk of sexually transmitted diseases

Trenholm, Christopher; Devaney, Barbara; Fortson, Kenneth; Clark, Melissa A.; Bridgespan, Lisa Quay; Wheeler, Justin

doi:10.1002/pam.20324

Cited by 98 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rigorous evaluations of AOUM or abstinence-based curricula have failed to demonstrate efficacy in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse, reducing number of partners, increasing condom use, or promoting secondary abstinence (i.e., cessation of sexual intercourse among sexually experienced youth) (Kirby 2008; Trenholm et al 2008). In contrast to abstinence approaches, a 2012 CDC meta-analysis of 66 comprehensive risk reduction programs for youth showed favorable effects on current sexual activity, frequency of sexual activity, number of sex partners, frequency of unprotected sexual activity, use of protection (either condoms and/or hormonal contraception), pregnancy, and STIs (Chin et al 2012).…”

Section: From “Ab-only” To “Ebi-only”: Us Federal Sexual Health Educamentioning

confidence: 99%

Invited Commentary: Broadening the Evidence for Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Education in the United States

Schalet

Santelli

Russell

et al. 2014

J Youth Adolescence

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific research has made major contributions to adolescent health by providing insights into factors that influence it and by defining ways to improve it. However, US adolescent sexual and reproductive health policies—particularly sexuality health education policies and programs—have not benefited from the full scope of scientific understanding. From 1998 to 2009, federal funding for sexuality education focused almost exclusively on ineffective and scientifically inaccurate abstinence-only-until-marriage (AOUM) programs. Since 2010, the largest source of federal funding for sexual health education has been the “tier 1” funding of the Office of Adolescent Health’s Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative. To be eligible for such funds, public and private entities must choose from a list of 35 programs that have been designated as “evidence-based” interventions (EBIs), determined based on their effectiveness at preventing teen pregnancies, reducing sexually transmitted infections, or reducing rates of sexual risk behaviors (i.e., sexual activity, contraceptive use, or number of partners). Although the transition from primarily AOUM to EBI is important progress, this definition of evidence is narrow and ignores factors known to play key roles in adolescent sexual and reproductive health. Important bodies of evidence are not treated as part of the essential evidence base, including research on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth; gender; and economic inequalities and health. These bodies of evidence underscore the need for sexual health education to approach adolescent sexuality holistically, to be inclusive of all youth, and to address and mitigate the impact of structural inequities. We provide recommendations to improve US sexual health education and to strengthen the translation of science into programs and policy.

show abstract

Section: From “Ab-only” To “Ebi-only”: Us Federal Sexual Health Educamentioning

confidence: 99%

Invited Commentary: Broadening the Evidence for Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Education in the United States

Schalet

Santelli

Russell

et al. 2014

J Youth Adolescence

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2007, Chin et al 2012, Kirby 2008, Trenholm et al 2008). HIV prevention programs for youth take place in a variety of settings including schools, health facilities, the mass media, and communities (e.g., community mobilization and outreach) (Ross et al 2006).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, most AUM curricula rigorously evaluated in the U.S. or elsewhere have failed to demonstrate efficacy in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse, in reducing number of partners, in increasing condom use, or in promoting secondary abstinence (i.e., cessation of sexual intercourse among sexually experienced youth) (Kirby and Ecker 2009, Mavedzenge et al 2011b, Underhill et al 2007, Chin et al 2012, Kirby 2008, Trenholm et al 2008). Kirby (2008) has suggested that AUM programs often fail to incorporate the characteristics of effective comprehensive curriculum-based programs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Abstinence promotion under PEPFAR: The shifting focus of HIV prevention for youth

Santelli

Speizer

Edelstein

2013

Global Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstinence-until-marriage (AUM) – strongly supported by religious conservatives in the U.S. - became a key element of initial HIV prevention efforts under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). AUM programs have demonstrated limited efficacy in changing behaviors, promoted medically inaccurate information, and withheld life-saving information about risk reduction. A focus on AUM also undermined national efforts in Africa to create integrated youth HIV prevention programs. PEPFAR prevention efforts after 2008 shifted to science-based programming, however vestiges of AUM remain. Primary prevention programs within PEPFAR are essential and nations must be able to design HIV prevention based on local needs and prevention science.

show abstract

“…For instance, the 2009 AEA's Outstanding Evaluation Award was presented to Mathematica Policy Research Inc., for their study, Evaluation of Abstinence-Only Education Programs (see Trenholm et al, 2008). This comprehensive, nine-year, congressionally mandated study, noted for its rigor, balance, and impact, examined abstinence-only education programs intended to reduce teen pregnancies as well as sexually transmitted diseases.…”

Section: Statistical Significancementioning

confidence: 97%

Insight Into Evaluation Practice: A Content Analysis of Designs and Methods Used in Evaluation Studies Published in North American Evaluation-Focused Journals

Christie

Fleischer

2010

American Journal of Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To describe the recent practice of evaluation, specifically method and design choices, the authors performed a content analysis on 117 evaluation studies published in eight North American evaluation-focused journals for a 3-year period (2004)(2005)(2006). The authors chose this time span because it follows the scientifically based research (SBR) movement, which prioritizes the use of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to study programs and policies. The purpose of this study was to determine the designs and data collection methods reportedly used in evaluation practice in light of federal guidelines enacted prior to 2004. Results show that, in contrast to the movement, nonexperimental designs dominate the field, that mixed-methods approaches just barely nudged out qualitative methods for most commonly used and that the majority of studies where statistical significance was reported indicated mixed significance.

show abstract

Impacts of abstinence education on teen sexual activity, risk of pregnancy, and risk of sexually transmitted diseases

Cited by 98 publications

References 7 publications

Invited Commentary: Broadening the Evidence for Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Education in the United States

Invited Commentary: Broadening the Evidence for Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Education in the United States

Abstinence promotion under PEPFAR: The shifting focus of HIV prevention for youth

Insight Into Evaluation Practice: A Content Analysis of Designs and Methods Used in Evaluation Studies Published in North American Evaluation-Focused Journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About