Taking be proud! Be responsible! To the suburbs: a replication study.
Taking be proud! Be responsible! To the suburbs: a replication study.
复制标题
感到自豪！
DOI：
10.1111/j.1931-2393.2009.4111209.x
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
5.8
通讯作者：
Lovegreen,LorenD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Borawski,ElaineA;Trapl,ErikaS;Adams-Tufts,Kimberly;Hayman,LauraL;Goodwin,MeredithA;Lovegreen,LorenD
背景：艾滋病预防研究的一个重要阶段是在不同的人群和不同的环境中复制成功的干预措施。负责任！一项最初针对城市黑人男性并在非学校环境中实施的成功干预措施，在学生群体多样化的城市和郊区学校的卫生课上进行了介绍。2000-2002年进行了一项分组随机干预研究，其中包括来自中西部大都市地区10所配对学校的1,357名9年级和10年级学生。一半的学校接受了干预，一半接受了一般的健康促进计划。学生的报告，他们的性行为和选定的认知介质进行了分析，立即以下的程序和4个月和12个月last.RESULTS：与学生相比，谁收到的控制课程，学生接触的干预报告显着更大的知识艾滋病毒，其他性病和避孕套;更大的信心，他们有能力控制性冲动，使用避孕套和协商使用避孕套;和更强的意图使用避孕套。分层分析显示，最强的干预措施的影响是对知识和效率的男性和学生参加郊区学校。干预措施没有影响性行为的开始，性交或避孕套的使用频率。结论：学校是一个合乎逻辑的和可行的设置传播和获取有关艾滋病毒的信息，包括预防策略。然而，干预的行为影响可能不容易转移时，该计划是教一个精心控制的，非学校设置。
CONTEXT:An important phase of HIV prevention research is replicating successful interventions with different groups and in different settings.METHODS:Be Proud! Be Responsible!, a successful intervention originally targeting black urban males and carried out in nonschool settings, was presented in health classes at urban and suburban schools with diverse student bodies. A group‐randomized intervention study, which included 1,357 ninth and 10th graders from 10 paired schools in a Midwestern metropolitan area, was conducted in 2000–2002. Half the schools received the intervention, and half received a general health promotion program. Students' reports of their sexual behavior and selected cognitive mediators were analyzed immediately following the programs and four and 12 months later.RESULTS:Compared with students who received the control curriculum, students exposed to the intervention reported significantly greater knowledge of HIV, other STDs and condoms; greater confidence in their ability to control sexual impulses, to use condoms and to negotiate the use of condoms; and stronger intentions to use condoms. Stratified analyses revealed that the strongest intervention impacts were on knowledge and efficacy among males and students attending suburban schools. The intervention had no impact on sexual initiation, frequency of intercourse or condom use.CONCLUSIONS:Schools are a logical and viable setting for the dissemination and acquisition of information about HIV, including prevention strategies. However, the behavioral impact of an intervention may not be easily transferable when the program is taught outside a carefully controlled, nonschool setting.