A new systematic review finds a growing research base related to adolescent dating violence prevention programs, but a need for more research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
Authors of this study include H Luz McNaughton Reyes PhD, Core Faculty at the UNC Injury Prevention Research Center (IPRC) and professor of Health Behavior at UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, and Laurie Graham PhD, professor at the University of Maryland School of Social Work and former IVP Fellow with the IPRC while a student at UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health.
Using PRISMA guidelines, the authors searched 18 databases for experimental and quasi-experimental program evaluations that assessed effects on adolescent dating violence victimization or perpetration, or both. A total of 52 program evaluations were identified of which 20 (38%) were implemented in LMICs.
Overall, half of the evaluations identified reported a significant preventive effect on at least one adolescent dating violence outcome, and this proportion did not differ between LMICs and HICs. However, there were differences across LMICs and HICs in the types of outcomes and study populations assessed. In particular, evaluations in LMICs were more likely than those in HICs to exclusively assess dating violence victimization outcomes among adolescent girls. Of the eight LMIC evaluations that evaluated effects on dating violence perpetration, only one reported a statistically significant association between program exposure and perpetration behavior.
Dr. Luz McNaughton Reyes
Lead author and core faculty at UNC IPRC
The programs ranged in terms of setting, population, and content. Most of the programs (75%) were conducted within schools. Almost 80% of the programs used a “universal prevention approach” rather than targeting a specific audience deemed at high-risk for adolescent dating violence. The three most prevalent types of program activities were (1) education or training for healthy relationships, (2) promotion of gender-equitable attitudes or norms, and (3) modifications to school environments, policies, or services.
The authors suggest a need to identify programs in LMICs that prevent adolescent dating violence perpetration and that have cross-cutting effects across different violence outcomes. In addition, further research is needed in both HICs and LMICs to develop and evaluate programs that target “upstream” drivers of violence and shed light on the causal mechanisms that explain the preventive impacts of effective programs.
Access the full article here.