Skip to content

Preventing Sexual Violence Through a Comprehensive, Peer-led Initiative

Preventing Sexual Violence Through a Comprehensive, Peer-led Initiative: A Process and Outcome Evaluation

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03207386
Enrollment
2647
Registered
2017-07-02
Start date
2017-02-27
Completion date
2020-07-01
Last updated
2021-11-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Sexual Violence

Keywords

Sexual Violence, Prevention, Mixed-Methods, Outcome Evaluation, Process Evaluation, Adolescence

Brief summary

The purpose of this multiple baseline study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive youth-led sexual violence (SV) prevention program, Youth Voices in Prevention (Youth VIP). The prevention program builds on youth-adult partnerships among middle and high school students in Rapid City, South Dakota. Consenting students will take part in a youth summit where they will be trained as popular opinion leaders to spread SV prevention messages among middle and high school youth and parents. Following the summit, youth will work in small groups focused on different aspects of evidence-based prevention strategies including bystander intervention, social marketing messaging, parent education, norms change, and social emotional learning. Multiple research methods will be used to examine implementation process and cost. In addition, consenting students will take six surveys across three years including several surveys before programming begins, and several to document Youth VIP outcomes after prevention programming takes place. Survey data from a demographically similar community will be used to assess changes over time among youth in Rapid City, SD. All phases of the project will be implemented with collaboration from a Research Programming Advisory Board of community members and professionals from Rapid City, SD.

Detailed description

Sexual violence (SV) impacts adolescents at rates higher than most other age demographics. Although it is a critical public health issue for youth, there are few prevention initiatives that lead to reductions in SV. There is increasing recognition that SV prevention efforts may be most effective if youth are central to the development and implementation of such efforts. Problematically, there are no rigorously evaluated youth-led SV prevention efforts, and researchers also know little about the process by which youth create prevention initiatives. Teen UP (TU) is a youth-led initiative in Rapid City, SD that focuses on addressing a variety of public health issues, including awareness about SV. This homegrown initiative is well integrated in the community and is the ideal platform on which additional multi-level, evidence-based SV prevention strategies can be added. Researchers and SV prevention specialists at the University of New Hampshire, in partnership with Rape Prevention Education-funded agencies in South Dakota (SD) (i.e., Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault \[The Network\] and Working Against Violence Inc. \[WAVI\]), will work together along with a number of community stakeholders (e.g., educators, peers, elders) and expert consultants to enhance TU to include additional SV prevention strategies, a project titled Youth Voices in Prevention (Youth VIP). Although the plan for the programming enhancement will be refined based on feedback from the Research and Programming Advisory Board (RPAB) and data collected during the refinement and planning phase of the project, the current plan is to convene a youth summit where high school youth will be trained as popular opinion leaders to diffuse SV prevention messages in addition to youth joining a formal working group specific to a SV prevention strategy that also aligns with youth's career aspirations. A mixed method approach will be used to measure implementation processes, fidelity, and costs over time, and to assess the impact of Youth VIP on rates of sexual violence perpetration among middle and high school students, as well as the secondary outcomes of sexual violence victimization, dating violence and bullying victimization and perpetration, depression, and suicidality. Collaboration with the community of students, parents, and professionals in Rapid City will be promoted by establishing a Research Programming Advisory Board (RPAB) that will meet monthly during the project. All students in grades 7 through 10 in the fall of 2017 will be invited to participate in two baseline and four follow-up surveys that will be given in school. Surveys will take place in fall and spring of each of three school years, and the cohort enrolled in fall of 2017 will be followed over time. Recruitment of students and parents is being done in close collaboration with the Rapid City Area School District. The investigators anticipate enrolling 2,000 students. Qualitative data includes Photovoice interviews (a technique where students take pictures of their community and describe how those pictures relate to violence in their community), interviews of students who attended programming, and interviews with key adult stakeholders. We will identify common themes in this data using content analysis, then code the interviews for these themes. We will present both the frequency that these themes emerged and key exemplary quotes. We will use a variety of methods to analyze the quantitative data. First, we will examine change in outcomes over time as a function of exposure to programming. Second, using social network analysis, we will examine change in outcomes as a function of the programming exposure of one's close friends. Third, we will use pooled cross-sectional analyses to compare students in the same grade levels over time as the program is implemented (e.g., compare this year's eight graders to last years' eighth graders). Fourth, we will use multilevel modeling to examine trajectories and changes in the cohorts (e.g., compare growth in this year's eight graders to last years' eighth graders) who are nested within schools. We will examine outcomes in these ways for primary outcome (sexual violence perpetration and victimization), intermediary outcomes (e.g., social norms), and secondary outcomes (e.g., suicidal thoughts).

Interventions

BEHAVIORALYouth VIP

Youth VIP involves youth in partnerships with adults to adapt evidence based sexual violence prevention strategies for the local community environment. Youth VIP includes a three day intensive youth summit for prevention training and ongoing youth-adult prevention working groups.

Sponsors

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CollaboratorFED
University of New Hampshire
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SEQUENTIAL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Multiple baseline survey design across three years including two baseline surveys prior to prevention programming and rollout of doses of programming across two years.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
12 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Must be able to complete online survey independently * Must be a student in the Rapid City community.

Exclusion criteria

* None

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Perpetration6 monthsWe used several measures to assess for a wide range of interpersonal violence victimization perpetration experiences during the past six months, all with response options 1 = yes or 0 = no. Outcome counts indicate number of participants who reported yes to any form of sexual violence perpetration. We used mirror items to assess for both victimization and perpetration experiences. Three items assessing sexual assault were drawn from Cook-Craig et al.'s (2014) measure that assessed for sexual coercion, physically-forced sex, and incapacitated sex. Five items from the YRBS were used to assess physically forced sexual contact, sexual dating violence, physical dating violence, bullying on school property, and electronic bullying (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). We used three items from the American Association of University Women (2001) to assess homophobic teasing, sexual harassment, and sexual rumors. Lastly, two items assessed homophobic bullying and racial bullying.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Victimization6 monthsWe used several measures to assess for a wide range of interpersonal violence victimization perpetration experiences during the past six months, all with response options 1 = yes or 0 = no. Outcome counts indicate number of participants who reported yes to any form of sexual violence victimization. We used mirror items to assess for both victimization and perpetration experiences. Three items assessing sexual assault were drawn from Cook-Craig et al.'s (2014) measure that assessed for sexual coercion, physically-forced sex, and incapacitated sex. Five items from the YRBS were used to assess physically forced sexual contact, sexual dating violence, physical dating violence, bullying on school property, and electronic bullying (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). We used three items from the American Association of University Women (2001) to assess homophobic teasing, sexual harassment, and sexual rumors. Lastly, two items assessed homophobic bullying and racial bullying.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Youth VIP
Youth VIP is a youth-led set of prevention strategies. Youth and their adult mentors are trained in evidence based sexual assault primary prevention strategies at a three day youth summit. The summit is followed by participation in working groups in which youth and their adult mentors will adapt best practices for sexual assault prevention to the Rapid City community and diffuse these strategies through both their own social networks and more formally in work in Rapid City middle and high schools. Youth VIP: Youth VIP involves youth in partnerships with adults to adapt evidence based sexual violence prevention strategies for the local community environment. Youth VIP includes a three day intensive youth summit for prevention training and ongoing youth-adult prevention working groups.
2,647
Total2,647

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicYouth VIP
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
2647 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
334 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
2239 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
74 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
410 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
38 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
58 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
259 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
30 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
29 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
1823 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
2647 participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Sex at Birth
Female
1355 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Sex at Birth
Male
1269 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Sex at Birth
Unknown
23 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 2,647
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 2,647
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 2,647

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Perpetration

We used several measures to assess for a wide range of interpersonal violence victimization perpetration experiences during the past six months, all with response options 1 = yes or 0 = no. Outcome counts indicate number of participants who reported yes to any form of sexual violence perpetration. We used mirror items to assess for both victimization and perpetration experiences. Three items assessing sexual assault were drawn from Cook-Craig et al.'s (2014) measure that assessed for sexual coercion, physically-forced sex, and incapacitated sex. Five items from the YRBS were used to assess physically forced sexual contact, sexual dating violence, physical dating violence, bullying on school property, and electronic bullying (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). We used three items from the American Association of University Women (2001) to assess homophobic teasing, sexual harassment, and sexual rumors. Lastly, two items assessed homophobic bullying and racial bullying.

Time frame: 6 months

Population: Participants could be in both the large camp condition and/or the small camp condition, thus numbers do not consistently add up to 2647 across the results reports for the study.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Attended Large CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Perpetration5 Participants
Did Not Attend Large CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Perpetration54 Participants
Attended Small CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Perpetration2 Participants
Did Not Attend Small CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Perpetration57 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Victimization

We used several measures to assess for a wide range of interpersonal violence victimization perpetration experiences during the past six months, all with response options 1 = yes or 0 = no. Outcome counts indicate number of participants who reported yes to any form of sexual violence victimization. We used mirror items to assess for both victimization and perpetration experiences. Three items assessing sexual assault were drawn from Cook-Craig et al.'s (2014) measure that assessed for sexual coercion, physically-forced sex, and incapacitated sex. Five items from the YRBS were used to assess physically forced sexual contact, sexual dating violence, physical dating violence, bullying on school property, and electronic bullying (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). We used three items from the American Association of University Women (2001) to assess homophobic teasing, sexual harassment, and sexual rumors. Lastly, two items assessed homophobic bullying and racial bullying.

Time frame: 6 months

Population: Participants could be in both the large camp condition and/or the small camp condition, thus numbers do not consistently add up to 2647 across the results reports for the study.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Attended Large CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Victimization13 Participants
Did Not Attend Large CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Victimization97 Participants
Attended Small CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Victimization6 Participants
Did Not Attend Small CampNumber of Participants Reporting Any Form of Sexual Violence Victimization104 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 18, 2026