IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i21p8183-d440495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Sexuality Education Programs Have Been Evaluated in Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Olena Ivanova

    (Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Medical Centre of the University of Munich (LMU), 80802 Munich, Germany
    German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Munich, 80802 Munich, Germany)

  • Masna Rai

    (Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München-German Research Centre for Environmental Health, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany)

  • Kristien Michielsen

    (International Centre for Reproductive Health (ICRH), Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
    Both authors contributed equally.)

  • Sónia Dias

    (NOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa & Comprehensive Health Research Center (CHRC), 1600-560 Lisbon, Portugal
    Both authors contributed equally.)

Abstract

Background: Complex sexual and reproductive health interventions, such as sexuality education (SE), contain multiple components and activities, which often requires a comprehensive evaluation design and adaptation to a specific context. In this review, we synthetize available scientific literature on types of evaluation designs used for SE programs in low- and lower-middle-income countries. Methods: Two databases yielded 455 publications, from which 20 articles met the inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize the findings. Evaluation approaches were compared to recommended evaluation frameworks. The quality of articles was assessed by using MMAT 2018. Results: A total of 15 interventions employed in 10 countries were evaluated in the 20 selected articles, with the quality of publications being moderate to high. Randomized controlled trial was the predominant study design, followed by quasi-experimental design. There were seven process evaluation studies, using mixed methods. Main outcomes reported were of public health or behavioral nature—condom use, sexual debut or delay, and number of sexual partners. By comparing evaluation designs to recommended frameworks, few studies fulfilled at least half of the criteria. Conclusions: Evaluations of SE are largely dominated by quantitative (quasi-)experimental designs and use of public health outcomes. To improve understanding of SE program effectiveness, it is important to assess the quality of the program development, its implementation, and its impact, using existing evaluation frameworks and recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Olena Ivanova & Masna Rai & Kristien Michielsen & Sónia Dias, 2020. "How Sexuality Education Programs Have Been Evaluated in Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-17, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:8183-:d:440495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/8183/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/8183/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Birte Snilstveit & Sandy Oliver & Martina Vojtkova, 2012. "Narrative approaches to systematic review and synthesis of evidence for international development policy and practice," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 409-429, September.
    2. Merrill, Katherine G. & Merrill, Jamison C. & Hershow, Rebecca B. & Barkley, Chris & Rakosa, Boitumelo & DeCelles, Jeff & Harrison, Abigail, 2018. "Linking at-risk South African girls to sexual violence and reproductive health services: A mixed-methods assessment of a soccer-based HIV prevention program and pilot SMS campaign," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 12-24.
    3. Ivanova, Olena & Pozo, Kathya Cordova & Segura, Zoyla Esmeralda & Vega, Bernardo & Chandra-Mouli, Venkatraman & Hindin, Michelle J. & Temmerman, Marleen & Decat, Peter & De Meyer, Sara & Michielsen, K, 2016. "Lessons learnt from the CERCA Project, a multicomponent intervention to promote adolescent sexual and reproductive health in three Latin America countries: a qualitative post-hoc evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 98-105.
    4. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    5. Hildie Leung & Daniel T. L. Shek & Edvina Leung & Esther Y. W. Shek, 2019. "Development of Contextually-relevant Sexuality Education: Lessons from a Comprehensive Review of Adolescent Sexuality Education Across Cultures," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Davidson, Angus Alexander & Young, Michael Denis & Leake, John Espie & O’Connor, Patrick, 2022. "Aid and forgetting the enemy: A systematic review of the unintended consequences of international development in fragile and conflict-affected situations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Fiona Mercer & Joanna Astrid Miler & Bernie Pauly & Hannah Carver & Kristina Hnízdilová & Rebecca Foster & Tessa Parkes, 2021. "Peer Support and Overdose Prevention Responses: A Systematic ‘State-of-the-Art’ Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Eftychia Ntostoglou & Dilip Khatiwada & Viktoria Martin, 2021. "The Potential Contribution of Decentralized Anaerobic Digestion towards Urban Biowaste Recovery Systems: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, December.
    4. Graham McDowell & Eleanor Stephenson & James Ford, 2014. "Adaptation to climate change in glaciated mountain regions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 77-91, September.
    5. Mathew Barnes & Purva Abhyankar & Elena Dimova & Catherine Best, 2020. "Associations between body dissatisfaction and self-reported anxiety and depression in otherwise healthy men: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-24, February.
    6. Luming Zhao & Jiaxi Peng & Shubin Yu, 2023. "Sustainable Luxury and Consumer Purchase Intention: A Systematic Literature Review," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    7. Edison D. Macusi & Darshel Ester P. Estor & Elaine Q. Borazon & Misael B. Clapano & Mudjekeewis D. Santos, 2022. "Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts of Shrimp Farming in the Philippines: A Critical Analysis Using PRISMA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, March.
    8. Vicki-Ann Ware & Kim Dunphy, 2019. "Methodological Practices in Research on Arts-Based Programs in International Development: A Systematic Review," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(3), pages 480-503, July.
    9. Maliphol, Sira, 2022. "Mobile-Assisted Language Teaching: A Systematic Review with Implications for Southeast Asia," ADBI Working Papers 1320, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    10. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    11. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    12. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    13. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    14. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    15. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    16. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    17. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    19. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    20. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:8183-:d:440495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.