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 
            -           PPRER0S22001      

# PPRER0S22001

Floren, M., Floren, K. (2022). Impact of the Choosing the Best program on sexual activity among students in communities committed to abstinence education: Additional analysis findings./em Practical Statistics LLC Final Report, Submitted to Choosing the Best Publishing.

Lieberman, L., Su, H. (2012). Impact of the Choosing the Best program in communities committed to abstinence education. SAGE Open, 1–12.

Lieberman, L., Su, H. (2014). New revised analysis report of the impact of the Choosing the Best program on sexual activity among students in communities committed to abstinence education./em

Choosing the Best

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; however, the analysis did not adjust for clustering of youth within schools and, therefore, the results are not used to determine evidence of effectiveness for TPPER.

### Program Information

### Evaluation Setting

### Study Sample

### Research Design

789

2

5 months after end of the intervention

The Choosing the Best program was evaluated using a cluster randomized controlled trial involving 9th grade students attending six schools in two school districts in Georgia. Four schools were randomly assigned to receive the eight sessions of the Choosing the Best program provided by Choosing the Best staff. Two schools were randomly assigned to serve as a control group that offered the typical abstinence-based classroom lessons. Surveys were administered immediately before the program (baseline), at the end of 9th grade (nine months after the baseline), and again at the start of 10th grade (14 months after the baseline).The authors reported a favorable impact on rates of sexual initiation at end of 9th grade, and that this favorable effect persisted at the start of 10th grade. However, the analyses conducted in this study did not account for having schools as the unit of random assignment, and, therefore, the results are not used to determine evidence of effectiveness for TPPER.The study also examined impacts on pro-abstinence attitudes, pro-abstinence beliefs, self-efficacy, empowerment and hopefulness, commitment to abstinence, parent-child communication, intention to delay sex, intention to wait until marriage, and intention to return to abstinence. Findings for these outcomes were not considered because they fell outside the scope of this review. In addition, the study examined impacts on time since last sexual encounter; however, the findings for this outcome do not meet the review criteria for evidence of effectiveness because they are based on an endogenous subgroup.

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.