Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Evidence and Innovation 
            -  Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review 
            -           PPRER0S22024      

# PPRER0S22024

Walsh, S., Jenner, E., Qaragholi, N., Henley, C., Demby, H., Leger, R., Burgess, K. (Under review). The impact of a high school-based positive youth development program on sexual health outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled trial.

Peer Group Connection — High School (PGC-HS)

High
This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that would suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the program

### Program Information

### Evaluation Setting

### Study Sample

### Research Design

1

Follow-up data collection took place in fall 2017, a year after baseline. Given the length of the intervention, this could have been 3 to 9 months after the end of the intervention

### Study Findings

The program was evaluated using a randomized controlled trial involving 9th grade students in 18 high schools in New York City and rural North Carolina. Youth were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that received the semester- or yearlong Peer Group Connection-High School (PGC-HS) program or a control group that received class as usual. Surveys were administered at the beginning of 9th grade before PGC-HS programming was offered (baseline) and at the beginning of 10th grade (follow-up).The study found that at the follow-up in the beginning of 10th grade, youth participating in the program were significantly less likely to report having ever had vaginal sex (effect size = -0.14). The study found no statistically significant program impacts on the other eligible outcomes examined: sexual initiation, frequency of sex in the past three months, number of sexual partners in the past three months, or vaginal sex without a condom in the past three months.The study also examined program impacts on measures of decision-making skills, goal-setting skills, perceived connection with peers, and school engagement. Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review.

NA = Not available. This means the authors did not report the information in the manuscripts associated with the studies we reviewed.

a This information was not available whenever authors did not report information for the treatment and comparison groups separately on outcome means, standard deviations, and/or sample sizes.

b Authors reported that the program effect (impact) estimate is statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.05 based on a two-tailed test.

c For some outcomes, having less of that outcome is favorable. In those cases, an effect with a negative sign is favorable to the treatment group (that is, the treatment group had a more favorable outcome than the comparison group, on average).

d An effect meets the review standards for credible evidence whenever it is statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.05 based on a two-tailed test, includes the appropriate adjustment for clustering (if applicable), and it is not based on an endogenous subgroup.