Table 2.
Description of study outcomes stratified by role of theory use in each study.
| Condom use at last sex | Ever/consistently used condom | Sexual debut, proportion of sexually active youth | Sexual intercourse in past months | Number of sexual partners | HIV incidence | HSV-2 | Other STIs | Overview | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theory used for development of intervention | Visser, 2005° | Ross, 2007++ | Visser, 2005−− | Maticka-Tyndale, 2007° | Visser, 2005° | Ross, 2007° | Ross, 2007° | Ross, 2007° | 44 outcomes |
| Magnani, 2005++ | Underwood, 2006++ | Magnani, 2005−− | Visser, 2007++ | Magnani, 2005++ | Jewkes, 2008° | Jewkes, 2008++ | Jewkes, 2008° | ++7 | |
| Maticka-Tyndale, 2007+ | Kim, 2001° | Maticka-Tyndale, 2007+ | Kim, 2001+ | Ross, 2007+ | Doyle, 2010° | Doyle, 2010° | Doyle, 2010° | +10 | |
| Ross, 2007+ | Magnani, 2005++ | Ross, 2007° | Visser, 2007−− | °22 | |||||
| Jewkes, 2008° | Atwood 2012° | Klepp, 1997+ | Kim, 2001+ | −1 | |||||
| Underwood, 2006° | Kim, 2001+ | Atwood, 2012−− | −−4 | ||||||
| Visser, 2007° | Underwood, 2006− | Doyle, 2010+ | |||||||
| Doyle, 2010° | Atwood, 2012+ | ||||||||
| Tibbits, 2011° | Burnet, 2011° | ||||||||
| Doyle, 2010° | |||||||||
| Tibbits, 2011° | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| James, 2006+ | Harvey, 2000++ | Harvey, 2000° | James, 2006+ | Harvey, 2000° | 12 outcomes | ||||
| Meekers, 1998° | Meekers, 1998° | Van Rossem, 1999+ | Van Rossem, 1999° | ++1 | |||||
| Theory used for development of evaluation or questionnaire | Van Rossem, 1999+ | Van Rossem, 1999+ | Meekers, 1998° | +5 | |||||
| °6 | |||||||||
| −0 | |||||||||
| −−0 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Van Rossem, 2000° | Van Rossem, 2000++ | Fitzgerald, 1999° | Fitzgerald, 1999° | Fitzgerald, 1999° | 15 outcomes | ||||
| Fitzgerald, 1999° | Meekers, 2005+ | Van Rossem, 2000° | Van Rossem, 2000+ | ++1 | |||||
| Theory used for development of intervention and evaluation or questionnaire | Meekers, 2005+ | Fitzgerald, 1999° | Plautz, 2003− | +3 | |||||
| Plautz, 2003° | Plautz, 2003° | °10 | |||||||
| Karnell, 2005° | −1 | ||||||||
| −−0 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Theory used, but uncertain in which phase of study | Shuey++ | 1 outcome | |||||||
| ++1 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Speizer+ | Agha, 2002° | Speizer++ | Speizer−− | Agha, 2002++ | Baird, 2012++ | Baird, 2012++ | Baird, 2012° | 18 outcomes | |
| Agha, 2002° | Okonofua++ | Brieger, 2001−− | Agha, 2002++ | Fawole, 1999° | ++6 | ||||
| Interventions not explicitly based on theory | Erulkar, 2004+ | Kuhn° | Fawole, 1999° | Erulkar, 2004° | Erulkar, 2004+ | +4 | |||
| Fawole, 1999° | Fawole, 1999° | Erulkar, 2004+ | °12 | ||||||
| Mason-Jones, 2011° | Baird, 2012° | Baird, 2012° | −0 | ||||||
| Mason-Jones, 2011−− | −−3 | ||||||||
++significant positive intervention effect on outcome variable for the whole study population.
+significant positive intervention impact on outcome variable for a subgroup of the target population, and no significant impact on the whole study population or whole population impact not reported.
°no significant intervention impact on the outcome variable.
−significant negative intervention effect on outcome variable in a sub-group of the target population, and no significant impact on the whole study population or whole population impact not reported.
−−significant negative intervention effect on the outcome variable for the whole study population.