Sanjana Pampati1, Michelle M Johns2, Leigh E Szucs2, Meg D Bishop3, Allen B Mallory3, Lisa C Barrios2, Stephen T Russell3. 1. Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Electronic address: mix2@cdc.gov. 2. Division of Adolescent and School Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas; University of Texas Population Research Center, Austin, Texas.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To synthesize the diverse body of literature on sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY) and sexual health education. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of the literature on SGMY and sexual health education, including SGMY perspectives on sexual health education, the acceptability or effectiveness of programs designed for SGMY, and SGMY-specific results of sexual health education programs delivered to general youth populations. RESULTS: A total of 32 articles were included. Sixteen qualitative studies with SGMY highlight key perspectives underscoring how youth gained inadequate knowledge from sexual health education experiences and received content that excluded their identities and behaviors. Thirteen studies examined the acceptability or effectiveness of sexual health interventions designed for SGMY from which key characteristics of inclusive sexual health education relating to development, content, and delivery emerged. One study found a sexual health education program delivered to a general population of youth was also acceptable for a subsample of sexual minority girls. CONCLUSIONS: Future research on SGMY experiences should incorporate populations understudied, including younger adolescents, sexual minority girls, and transgender persons. Further, the effectiveness of inclusive sexual health education in general population settings requires further study.
PURPOSE: To synthesize the diverse body of literature on sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY) and sexual health education. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of the literature on SGMY and sexual health education, including SGMY perspectives on sexual health education, the acceptability or effectiveness of programs designed for SGMY, and SGMY-specific results of sexual health education programs delivered to general youth populations. RESULTS: A total of 32 articles were included. Sixteen qualitative studies with SGMY highlight key perspectives underscoring how youth gained inadequate knowledge from sexual health education experiences and received content that excluded their identities and behaviors. Thirteen studies examined the acceptability or effectiveness of sexual health interventions designed for SGMY from which key characteristics of inclusive sexual health education relating to development, content, and delivery emerged. One study found a sexual health education program delivered to a general population of youth was also acceptable for a subsample of sexual minority girls. CONCLUSIONS: Future research on SGMY experiences should incorporate populations understudied, including younger adolescents, sexual minority girls, and transgender persons. Further, the effectiveness of inclusive sexual health education in general population settings requires further study.
Authors: José A Bauermeister; Emily S Pingel; Laura Jadwin-Cakmak; Gary W Harper; Keith Horvath; Gretchen Weiss; Patricia Dittus Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2015-10
Authors: Chelsea N Proulx; Robert W S Coulter; James E Egan; Derrick D Matthews; Christina Mair Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2019-01-26 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Brittany M Charlton; Heather L Corliss; Stacey A Missmer; Margaret Rosario; Donna Spiegelman; S Bryn Austin Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-06-22 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Riley J Steiner; Nicole Liddon; Andrea L Swartzendruber; Karen Pazol; Jessica M Sales Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2017-12-26 Impact factor: 6.604
Authors: Maria Victoria Carrera-Fernández; María Lameiras-Fernández; Nazaret Blanco-Pardo; Yolanda Rodríguez-Castro Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 3.390