Conducting rigorous research with subgroups of at-risk youth: lessons learned from a teen pregnancy prevention project in Alaska

• Published in: International Journal of Circumpolar Health
• Main Authors: Hohman-Billmeier, Kathryn, Nye, Margaret, Martin, Stephanie
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Taylor and Francis 2016
• Subjects: at-risk youth; randomized control trials; Alaska youth; peer education; evidence based interventions; sexual health education curriculum; Circumpolar Health; International Journal of Circumpolar Health; Alaska
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7805

In 2010, Alaska Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) received federal funding to test an evidence-based teen pregnancy prevention program. The grant required a major modification to an existing program and a randomized control trial (RCT) to test its effectiveness. As the major modifications, Alaska used peer educators instead of adults to deliver the program to youth aged 1419 instead of the original curriculum intended age range of 1214. Cultural and approach adaptations were included as well. After 4 years of implementation and data collection, the sample was too small to provide statistically significant results. The lack of findings gave no information about the modification, nor any explanation of how the curriculum was received, or reasons for the small sample. This paper reports on a case study follow-up to the RCT to better understand outcome and implementation results. For this study, researchers reviewed project documents and interviewed peer educators, state and local staff, and evaluators. Three themes emerged from the data: (a) the professional growth of peer educators and development of peer education, (b) difficulties resulting from curriculum content, especially for subpopulations of sexually active youth, youth identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and/or asexual, pregnant, and parenting youth and (c) the appropriateness of an RCT with subpopulations of at-risk youth. Three recommendations emerged from the case study. First, including as many stakeholders as possible in the program and evaluation design phases is essential, and must be supported by appropriate funding streams and training. Second, there must be recognition of the multiple small subpopulations found in Alaska when adapting programs designed for a larger and more homogeneous population. Third, RCTs may not be appropriate for all population subgroups. Yes