PURPOSE: In order to consider the potential contribution of universal versus targeted prevention interventions, the authors examined what is the distribution of established risk variables for teenage motherhood? from where in these distributions do births arise? and how does this distribution/determination of risk vary between studies? METHODS: Secondary data analysis of three British longitudinal studies. RESULTS: For all cohorts and variables, the 'risk' category was the least frequent. Continuous risk factors were normally distributed. A high rate of teenage motherhood within a risk category often translated into low 'contribution' to the overall rate (eg, expectation to leave school at the minimum age among the 1989/1990-born cohort) and vice versa. Most young women had a low probability of teenage motherhood. For any targeting strategy, combining risk factors and a low threshold of predicted probability would be necessary to achieve adequate sensitivity. Assessing between-cohort applicability of findings, the authors find that the numbers of teenage parents is poorly estimated and estimates of the variability and direction of risk may also be inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: With reference to a number of established risk factors, there is not a core of easily identifiable multiply disadvantaged girls who go on to constitute the majority of teenage mothers in these studies. While individual risk factors are unlikely to enable targeting, a composite may have some limited potential, albeit with a low threshold for 'risk' and with the caveat that evidence from one population may not inform good targeting in another. It is likely that universal approaches will have more impact.
PURPOSE: In order to consider the potential contribution of universal versus targeted prevention interventions, the authors examined what is the distribution of established risk variables for teenage motherhood? from where in these distributions do births arise? and how does this distribution/determination of risk vary between studies? METHODS: Secondary data analysis of three British longitudinal studies. RESULTS: For all cohorts and variables, the 'risk' category was the least frequent. Continuous risk factors were normally distributed. A high rate of teenage motherhood within a risk category often translated into low 'contribution' to the overall rate (eg, expectation to leave school at the minimum age among the 1989/1990-born cohort) and vice versa. Most young women had a low probability of teenage motherhood. For any targeting strategy, combining risk factors and a low threshold of predicted probability would be necessary to achieve adequate sensitivity. Assessing between-cohort applicability of findings, the authors find that the numbers of teenage parents is poorly estimated and estimates of the variability and direction of risk may also be inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: With reference to a number of established risk factors, there is not a core of easily identifiable multiply disadvantaged girls who go on to constitute the majority of teenage mothers in these studies. While individual risk factors are unlikely to enable targeting, a composite may have some limited potential, albeit with a low threshold for 'risk' and with the caveat that evidence from one population may not inform good targeting in another. It is likely that universal approaches will have more impact.
Authors: George C Patton; Susan M Sawyer; John S Santelli; David A Ross; Rima Afifi; Nicholas B Allen; Monika Arora; Peter Azzopardi; Wendy Baldwin; Christopher Bonell; Ritsuko Kakuma; Elissa Kennedy; Jaqueline Mahon; Terry McGovern; Ali H Mokdad; Vikram Patel; Suzanne Petroni; Nicola Reavley; Kikelomo Taiwo; Jane Waldfogel; Dakshitha Wickremarathne; Carmen Barroso; Zulfiqar Bhutta; Adesegun O Fatusi; Amitabh Mattoo; Judith Diers; Jing Fang; Jane Ferguson; Frederick Ssewamala; Russell M Viner Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ruth Ponsford; Elizabeth Allen; Rona Campbell; Diana Elbourne; Alison Hadley; Maria Lohan; G J Melendez-Torres; Catherine H Mercer; Steve Morris; Honor Young; Chris Bonell Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2018-05-23
Authors: Clare Tanton; Lorraine McDonagh; Melissa Cabecinha; Soazig Clifton; Rebecca Geary; Greta Rait; John Saunders; Jackie Cassell; Chris Bonell; Kirstin R Mitchell; Catherine H Mercer Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 4.135