“…While some behavioural programmes targeting adolescent sexual risk-taking behaviour have demonstrated only modest success ( DiCenso et al, 2002; Shepherd et al, 2010 ), systematic reviews have identified the characteristics of effective RSE programmes which might help optimise their potential impact on sexual risk-taking behaviours ( Bailey et al, 2010; Guse et al, 2012; Kirby, Laris, & Rolleri, 2006; Kirby, 2007; Kirby, 2002; Noar, Pierce, & Black, 2010; Robin et al, 2004; Shepherd et al, 2010 ). These include the use of theoretically-based interventions targeting sexual and psychosocial mediating variables such as knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, intentions, perceptions of risk, and perceptions of peer norms which are theoretically linked to sexual behaviour change ( Ajzen & Madden, 1986; Cane, O’Connor, & Michie, 2012; Michie, Johnston, Abraham, Francis, & Eccles, 2013; Rivis, Sheeran, & Armitage, 2009 ); the use of culturally-sensitive and gender-specific interventions ( Marsiglio, 2006; Ries & Sonenstein, 2006 ); the use of interactive modalities which promote personal identification with the educational issues and engagement of young people ( Bailey et al, 2010; Guse et al, 2012 ); the use of skills-building components ( Oringanje et al, 2009; Wight, Abraham, & Scott, 1998 ); the involvement of parents in the RSE process ( Grossman, Frye, Charmaraman, & Erkut, 2013 ); and the facilitation of linkages with sexual health support services ( Coyle et al, 1999 ).…”