4.2 Article

Effects of the SATZ teacher-led school HIV prevention programmes on adolescent sexual behaviour: cluster randomised controlled trials in three sub-Saharan African sites

期刊

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH
卷 4, 期 2, 页码 111-122

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.inhe.2012.02.001

关键词

Adolescents; HIV; HIV prevention; Sexual behaviour; Randomised controlled trial; Sub-Saharan Africa

资金

  1. European Commission - International Cooperation Activities Research Programme [ICA4-CT-2002-10038]
  2. European Union

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the effects on young adolescent sexual risk behaviour of teacher-led school HIV prevention programmes were examined in two sites in South Africa (Cape Town and Mankweng) and one site in Tanzania (Dar es Salaam). In Cape Town, Dar es Salaam and Mankweng, 26,24 and 30 schools, respectively, were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison groups. Primary outcomes were delayed sexual debut and condom use among adolescents aged 12-14 years (grade 8 in South Africa and grades 5 and 6 in Tanzania). In total, 5352, 4197 and 2590 students participated at baseline in 2004 in Cape Town, Dar es Salaam and Mankweng, respectively, and 73% (n=3926), 88% (n = 3693) and 83% (n = 2142) were retained 12-15 months later. At baseline, 13% (n = 224), 5% (n = 100) and 17% (n = 164) had had their sexual debut, and 44% (n = 122), 20% (n = 17) and 37% (n = 57) of these used a condom at last sex, respectively. In Dar es Salaam, students in the intervention were less likely to have their sexual debut during the study (OR 0.65,95% CI 0.48-0.87). In Cape Town and Mankweng, the intervention had no impact. The current interventions were effective at delaying sexual debut in Dar es Salaam but not in South Africa, where they need to be supplemented with programmes to change the environment in which adolescents make decisions about sexual behaviour. (C) 2012 Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据