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.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 5;17(21):8183. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17218183.
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.
复杂的性与生殖健康干预措施,如性教育(SE),包含多个组成部分和活动,这通常需要全面的评估设计,并适应特定的背景。在本次综述中,我们综合了在中低收入国家开展 SE 项目所使用的评估设计类型的现有科学文献。
两个数据库共产生了 455 篇文献,其中 20 篇文章符合纳入标准。采用叙述性综合方法来总结研究结果。将评估方法与推荐的评估框架进行比较。使用 MMAT 2018 评估文章的质量。
在 20 篇选定的文章中,共评估了 10 个国家的 15 项干预措施,出版物的质量从中等到较高。随机对照试验是主要的研究设计,其次是准实验设计。有 7 项使用混合方法的过程评估研究。主要报告的结果是公共卫生或行为性质的,包括避孕套使用、性初体验或延迟以及性伴侣数量。通过将评估设计与推荐框架进行比较,很少有研究至少满足一半的标准。
SE 的评估主要由定量(准)实验设计和公共卫生结果主导。为了更好地了解 SE 项目的效果,使用现有的评估框架和建议,评估项目的开发质量、实施情况及其影响非常重要。