Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Authors did not give balanced interpretation of their findings
EDITOR Rather, this was a study that compared the efficacy of theory driven
sex education with conventional sex education. What DiCenso et al
found, contrary to previous findings,2 is that theory driven sex education did not outperform conventional sex education. The
strongest conclusion that can be drawn is that in this select group of
studies, the two conditions come out equal in terms of behavioural
outcomes. It is troubling that DiCenso et al point this out only late
in their paper as essentially an afterthought.
In addition, given the study's findings, it would seem crucial for
DiCenso et al to suggest answers to this question: Why are some sex
education programmes successful and others are not? Despite 10 hypotheses tested and considerable heterogeneity among studies, they
were not able to answer this question. As a result it seems that the
field is no further ahead in understanding this now than it was before
this study. At the very least, DiCenso et al could have better
addressed this issue, as others have done.2
My objection is not to the study. Such reviews can and often do help
move the field forward. Rather, as I have said
previously,3 my objection is to conclusions drawn from a
study that did not ask the questions in the context of that study.
Since nearly all of the adolescents in these trials received some type
of sex education, we cannot know what the natural trajectory of
behaviour would have been without such education. Thus the strongest
interpretation of these data is that theory based programmes did not
have more impact than conventional programmes, within the set of
studies reviewed. Although this runs counter to much of the literature in this field,
2 4 5
it is the result of this particular review and one that demands further interpretation and exploration.
DiCenso et al provided a rigorous, systematic review of
randomised, controlled trials to reduce unintended pregnancies in
adolescents.1 They did not, however, provide a balanced interpretation of their findings. Specifically, the main research question in the study and the conclusions that were drawn from it are
inconsistent. Since within 21 of 26 trials reviewed, or 81%, the
control condition was actually conventional sex education, this was not
a study about whether or not sex education works.
HIV Prevention Research, Department of Communication,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA
| 1. |
DiCenso A, Guyatt G, Willan A, Griffith L.
Interventions to reduce unintended pregnancies among adolescents: systematic review of randomised controlled trials.
BMJ
2002;
324:
1426-1434 |
| 2. | Kirby D. Emerging answers: research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy. In: Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001. |
| 3. |
Noar SM, Zimmerman RS.
Reducing sexually transmitted infections among gay men: no doubt should be cast on efficacy of cognitive behavioural interventions.
BMJ
2001;
323:
867 |
| 4. | Office of the Surgeon General. The Surgeon General's call to action to promote sexual health and responsible sexual behavior. Rockville, MD: Office of the Surgeon General, 2001. |
| 5. | Rotherum-Borus MJ, O'Keefe Z, Kracker R, Foo H. Prevention of HIV among adolescents. Prev Sci 2000; 1: 15-30[CrossRef][Medline]. |
Changes in social, economic, and educational policy need to be taken into account
EDITOR
Two recent papers
a systematic review and a randomised
controlled trial
report little or no influence of primary preventive interventions and sex education on teenage sexual activity and unintended pregnancy in adolescents.
1 2
A recent
BMJ news item may hold the key to these disappointing
findings.3

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Teenage birth rates by literacy distribution among 13 countries in the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD)
4 5
The systematic review identified 22 studies, 21 from the United States and one from Canada.1 The randomised controlled trial was conducted in Scotland.2 The United States (52.1 births/1000 women 15-19 years) is first, the United Kingdom (30.8 births/1000) second, and Canada (20.2 births/1000) eighth highest in the league table of teenage births among 28 rich nations.3 It is likely that in these countries more powerful factors are at work limiting the effectiveness of short term, education based interventions.
Although open attitudes to adolescent sexuality and availability of contraception all contribute to the Dutch success in reducing teenage pregnancies,3 a further important underlying factor considered in a Unicef report but not mentioned in the BMJ news item, is the relation of teenage births to income and educational inequality.4 Teenage birth rates/1000 women aged 15-19 years are positively correlated (r=0.44, P<0.05) with income inequality (the Gini coefficient based on per capita household income) among 25 countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).4 The figure shows a strongly positive correlation (r=0.91, P<0.01) between teenage birth rates and literacy distribution (90th centile/10th centile) among the 13 OECD countries participating in the international adult literacy survey 1994-8.5
Limited interventions, such as school based sex education, abstinence
programmes, and family planning clinics could not realistically be
expected to overcome the powerful forces generating inequality that are
prevalent in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
Reduction in teenage birth rates in these countries is likely to depend
as much on changes in social, economic, and educational policy as on
school based sex education.
Nick Spencer
School of Postgraduate Medical Education, University of
Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL n.j.spencer{at}warwick.ac.uk
1.
DiCenso A, Guyatt G, Willan A, Griffith L.
Interventions to reduce unintended pregnancies among adolescents: systematic review of randomised controlled trials.
BMJ
2002;
324:
1426-1430. (15 June.)
2.
Wright D, Raab GM, Henderson M, Abraham C, Buston K, Hart G, et al.
Limits of teacher delivered sex education: interim behavioural outcomes from randomised trial.
BMJ
2002;
324:
1430-1433 3.
Kmietowicz Z.
US and UK are top in teenage pregnancy rates.
BMJ
2002;
324:
1354 4.
UNICEF.
A league table of teenage births in rich nations. Innocenti report card No 3.
Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2001.
5.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Literacy in the information age.
Paris: OECD, 2001.
© BMJ 2002
UK medical students have published unreleased government plans to restrict failed asylum seekers' access to medical care