A Rapid Review of Interventions to Prevent First Pregnancy among Adolescents and Its Applicability to Latin America

Estrada, Fátima; Atienzo, Erika E.; Cruz-Jiménez, Lizeth; Campero, Lourdes

doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2021.01.022

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Clinical Relevance Score Karjalainen et al [ 68 ] Report quality and applicability of results P1: RCTs P2: reviewers 3 items 3-point-scale No specific information on tool development. Estrada´s applicability assessment criteria Estrada et al [ 82 ] Applicability of population, intervention, implementation and environmental context to Latin America P1: RCTs P2: reviewers 5 domains with 8 items 3-point-scale for each domain Deductive item generation from the review by Munthe-Kaas et al [ 17 ]. Factors and items were adapted, and pilot tested by the review team ( n = 4) until consensus was reached.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was mainly due to insufficient description of the construct to be measured, the target population, or missing pilot tests. Six development studies had a “doubtful” methodological quality [ 22 , 75 , 77 , 79 , 82 , 83 ] and three had an “adequate” methodological quality [ 47 , 48 , 94 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the methodological quality of the content validity studies was “adequate” and “very good” only for the Rating of Included Trials on the Efficacy-Effectiveness Spectrum (RITES) tool [ 47 ] and “doubtful” for Cho´s Clinical Relevance Instrument [ 79 ], the “external validity”-dimension of the Downs & Black-checklist [ 22 ], the “Selection Bias”-dimension of the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool [ 98 ], and the “Clinical Relevance” tool [ 81 ]. The overall certainty of evidence for content validity was “very low” for 19 tools (mainly due to very serious risk of bias and serious indirectness) [ 63 – 76 , 78 , 82 , 86 , 88 , 100 ], “low” for three tools (mainly due to serious risk of bias or serious indirectness) [ 77 , 83 , 94 ] and “moderate” for six tools (mainly due to serious risk of bias or serious indirectness) [ 22 , 47 , 79 , 81 , 92 , 98 ]. All but one tool had an “indeterminate” content validity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… GRADE Moderate Clinical relevance scores [ 68 ] CGMP (?) GRADE Very Low Estrada´s applicability assessment criteria [ 82 ] CGMP (?) GRADE Very Low External Validity Assessment Tool (EVAT) [ 83 ] CGMP (?)…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties

Jung

Balzer

Braun

et al. 2022

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Internal and external validity are the most relevant components when critically appraising randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for systematic reviews. However, there is no gold standard to assess external validity. This might be related to the heterogeneity of the terminology as well as to unclear evidence of the measurement properties of available tools. The aim of this review was to identify tools to assess the external validity of RCTs. It was further, to evaluate the quality of identified tools and to recommend the use of individual tools to assess the external validity of RCTs in future systematic reviews. Methods A two-phase systematic literature search was performed in four databases: PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO via OVID, and CINAHL via EBSCO. First, tools to assess the external validity of RCTs were identified. Second, studies investigating the measurement properties of these tools were selected. The measurement properties of each included tool were appraised using an adapted version of the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Results 38 publications reporting on the development or validation of 28 included tools were included. For 61% (17/28) of the included tools, there was no evidence for measurement properties. For the remaining tools, reliability was the most frequently assessed property. Reliability was judged as “sufficient” for three tools (very low certainty of evidence). Content validity was rated as “sufficient” for one tool (moderate certainty of evidence). Conclusions Based on these results, no available tool can be fully recommended to assess the external validity of RCTs in systematic reviews. Several steps are required to overcome the identified difficulties to either adapt and validate available tools or to develop a better suitable tool. Trial registration Prospective registration at Open Science Framework (OSF): 10.17605/OSF.IO/PTG4D.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties

Jung

Balzer

Braun

et al. 2022

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study provided relevant information about gender influence in the implementation climate of a sexuality education program, which has implications for the Chilean and Latin American contexts. It is necessary to point out that although sexuality education programs in Latin America have similarities, there are also differences based on the cultural context (Estrada et al, 2021). The results assist in understanding the reality of the implementation of sexuality education school interventions, and based on this knowledge can help to identify which elements would help to strengthen these programs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Between Acceptance and Rejection: How Gender Influences the Implementation Climate of a School Sexuality Education Program

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation climate is the shared reception of the individuals involved in the intervention; it is a fundamental determinant of the success of program implementation. One of the factors that affects the implementation climate is gender, since it can influence the commitment of the participants toward sexuality education. This study aims to identify the implementation climate for students who receive a school sexuality education program and explore whether their gender is related to the acceptance of the intervention. A selective quantitative method was used, and a survey was designed to measure implementation climate. A confirmation factorial analysis (CFA) using Mplus 7.0 was conducted to establish the structure of the instrument. A cluster analysis was performed to determine levels of implementation climate. To measure the association between participants’ gender and the implementation climate, a Chi-square analysis was performed between each cluster, the gender of the students and each cluster and the type of school (single-sex girls’ schools, single-sex boys’ schools and co-educational schools). The results demonstrated four levels of implementation climate: acceptance, receptivity, conflict and rejection. Significant differences were observed in the relationship between these levels and the gender of the participants. Acceptance was associated with single-sex girls’ schools and female students, conflict and rejection were associated with a single-sex boys’ schools and male students, and co-educational schools were associated with conflict. This shows that there is a relationship between the different levels of the implementation climate and the gender.

show abstract

Consensus on the definition and assessment of external validity of randomized controlled trials: A Delphi study

Jung,

Braun,

Armijo‐Olivo

et al. 2023

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

External validity is an important parameter that needs to be considered for decision making in health research, but no widely accepted measurement tool for the assessment of external validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exists. One of the most limiting factors for creating such a tool is probably the substantial heterogeneity and lack of consensus in this field. The objective of this study was to reach consensus on a definition of external validity and on criteria to assess the external validity of RCTs included in systematic reviews. A three‐round online Delphi study was conducted. The development of the Delphi survey was based on findings from a previous systematic review. Potential panelists were identified through a comprehensive web search. Consensus was reached when at least 67% of the panelists agreed to a proposal. Eighty‐four panelists from different countries and various disciplines participated in at least one round of this study. Consensus was reached on the definition of external validity (“External validity is the extent to which results of trials provide an acceptable basis for generalization to other circumstances such as variations in populations, settings, interventions, outcomes, or other relevant contextual factors”), and on 14 criteria to assess the external validity of RCTs in systematic reviews. The results of this Delphi study provide a consensus‐based reference standard for future tool development. Future research should focus on adapting, pilot testing, and validating these criteria to develop measurement tools for the assessment of external validity.

show abstract

A Rapid Review of Interventions to Prevent First Pregnancy among Adolescents and Its Applicability to Latin America

Cited by 5 publications

References 24 publications

Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties

Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties

Between Acceptance and Rejection: How Gender Influences the Implementation Climate of a School Sexuality Education Program

Consensus on the definition and assessment of external validity of randomized controlled trials: A Delphi study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About