9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Evaluations of Prevention Programs for Sexual, Dating, and Intimate Partner Violence for Boys and Men: A Systematic Review

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Among violence prevention educators and researchers, there is growing interest in sexual, dating, and intimate partner violence (SV/DV/IPV) prevention programs for males because of evidence showing that boys and men are more likely than girls and women to perpetrate SV as well as more severe forms of DV/IPV. To date, comprehensive guidance on the content, structure, delivery, and effectiveness of such programs is limited. We reviewed randomized controlled studies that evaluated SV/DV/IPV perpetration prevention programs for boys and men. Searches yielded 5,249 potential documents for review of which 10 met inclusion criteria—representing 9 unique studies of 7 distinct programs. Two reviewers independently reviewed and abstracted data from these studies regarding program setting and target audience; type of violence addressed; number and length of program sessions; program duration, topics, activities, and delivery mode; and implementer details. Study characteristics were also examined (sample size, participant characteristics, recruitment, randomization, comparison/control condition, data collection protocols, attrition, measures of violence perpetration, and perpetration findings). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess study design quality. Results show considerable heterogeneity among program content and delivery strategies, study designs, and outcome measurement. Study sample size ranged widely, and most used cluster-randomized designs, recruited undergraduate college students, and evaluated a multisession program delivered via group sessions. Only one program reduced men’s self-reported SV perpetration. Accordingly, critical gaps exist around “what works” for SV/DV/IPV perpetration prevention programs for boys and men.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          What works in prevention: Principles of effective prevention programs.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration ☆

            This systematic review examined 140 outcome evaluations of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration. The review had two goals: 1) to describe and assess the breadth, quality, and evolution of evaluation research in this area; and 2) to summarize the best available research evidence for sexual violence prevention practitioners by categorizing programs with regard to their evidence of effectiveness on sexual violence behavioral outcomes in a rigorous evaluation. The majority of sexual violence prevention strategies in the evaluation literature are brief, psycho-educational programs focused on increasing knowledge or changing attitudes, none of which have shown evidence of effectiveness on sexually violent behavior using a rigorous evaluation design. Based on evaluation studies included in the current review, only three primary prevention strategies have demonstrated significant effects on sexually violent behavior in a rigorous outcome evaluation: Safe Dates (Foshee et al., 2004); Shifting Boundaries (building-level intervention only, Taylor, Stein, Woods, Mumford, & Forum, 2011); and funding associated with the 1994 U.S. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA; Boba & Lilley, 2009). The dearth of effective prevention strategies available to date may reflect a lack of fit between the design of many of the existing programs and the principles of effective prevention identified by Nation et al. (2003).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Preventing sexual aggression among college men: an evaluation of a social norms and bystander intervention program.

              Men and women living in randomly selected 1st-year dormitories participated in tailored single-sex sexual assault prevention or risk-reduction programs, respectively. An evaluation of the men's project is presented (N = 635). The program incorporated social norms and bystander intervention education and had an impact on self-reported sexual aggression and an effect on men's perceptions that their peers would intervene when they encountered inappropriate behavior in others. Relative to the control group, participants also reported less reinforcement for engaging in sexually aggressive behavior, reported fewer associations with sexually aggressive peers, and indicated less exposure to sexually explicit media.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
                Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
                SAGE Publications
                1524-8380
                1552-8324
                July 2019
                July 2019
                : 152483801985115
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
                [2 ]Injury Prevention Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
                [3 ]Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
                [4 ]Department of Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
                Article
                10.1177/1524838019851158
                31262233
                08194f7b-929f-4f88-aaee-069d4beb694b
                © 2019

                http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article