Courtney M Dewart1, Jaclyn Serpico2, Markus J Steiner3, Maria F Gallo2. 1. The Ohio State University, College of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. Electronic address: dewart.5@buckeyemail.osu.edu. 2. The Ohio State University, College of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. 3. Contraceptive Technology Innovation Division, FHI 360, 359 Blackwell Street, Durham, NC 27701, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review of the effectiveness of electronic health education tools designed to improve knowledge, attitudes or practices related to contraception. METHODS: Eligible studies consisted of English-language reports published after 1990 that quantified the effects of an electronic intervention on any of the following outcomes: contraceptive knowledge, attitude toward contraceptives, contraceptive method choice, contraceptive use or pregnancy. We conducted a systematic search of multiple electronic databases including MEDLINE, Global Health, Academic Search Complete, Cochrane Library and Grey Literature Report. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for reporting. RESULTS: Of 143 full-text reports assessed for eligibility, 13 studies described in 16 reports were eligible for inclusion. Of six studies that evaluated video interventions, all were randomized controlled trials, and four reported any statistically significant difference between intervention groups on knowledge, method choice or pregnancy. Of seven studies of interactive computer applications, five were randomized controlled trials, and two were nonrandomized comparison studies. Four of these seven studies found statistically significant difference between study arms in contraceptive knowledge, attitudes or contraceptive use. While most differences favored the intervention, effects were generally limited with respect to clinical relevance and the number of outcomes impacted. CONCLUSIONS: Published assessments of electronic interventions for improving contraception-related outcomes are limited. Formal evaluations of interventions and publication of results are needed to determine the efficacy of electronic tools for contraceptive education and guide development of new interventions.
OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review of the effectiveness of electronic health education tools designed to improve knowledge, attitudes or practices related to contraception. METHODS: Eligible studies consisted of English-language reports published after 1990 that quantified the effects of an electronic intervention on any of the following outcomes: contraceptive knowledge, attitude toward contraceptives, contraceptive method choice, contraceptive use or pregnancy. We conducted a systematic search of multiple electronic databases including MEDLINE, Global Health, Academic Search Complete, Cochrane Library and Grey Literature Report. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for reporting. RESULTS: Of 143 full-text reports assessed for eligibility, 13 studies described in 16 reports were eligible for inclusion. Of six studies that evaluated video interventions, all were randomized controlled trials, and four reported any statistically significant difference between intervention groups on knowledge, method choice or pregnancy. Of seven studies of interactive computer applications, five were randomized controlled trials, and two were nonrandomized comparison studies. Four of these seven studies found statistically significant difference between study arms in contraceptive knowledge, attitudes or contraceptive use. While most differences favored the intervention, effects were generally limited with respect to clinical relevance and the number of outcomes impacted. CONCLUSIONS: Published assessments of electronic interventions for improving contraception-related outcomes are limited. Formal evaluations of interventions and publication of results are needed to determine the efficacy of electronic tools for contraceptive education and guide development of new interventions.
Authors: Sofía L Carbone; Melissa Guillen; Jaime J Ramirez; Sara E Vargas; Connie Fei Lu; Melissa L Getz; Yaa Frimpong; Kelley A Smith; Claire Stout; Iris Tong; Melanie Hill; Robert E Berry; Abigail Harrison; Kate M Guthrie Journal: Sex Health Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 2.706
Authors: Judith Stephenson; Julia V Bailey; Ana Gubijev; Preethy D'Souza; Sandy Oliver; Ann Blandford; Rachael Hunter; Jill Shawe; Greta Rait; Nataliya Brima; Andrew Copas Journal: Digit Health Date: 2020-06-26