| Literature DB >> 35930332 |
H Luz McNaughton Reyes1, Eliana Gabriela Armora Langoni1, Laurel Sharpless1, Natalie Blackburn2, Agnieszka McCort2, Rebecca J Macy3, Kathryn E Moracco1, Vangie A Foshee1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) between caregivers are at an increased risk of becoming involved in dating violence during adolescence. However, to date, few adolescent dating violence (ADV) prevention programs have been developed for and evaluated with youth exposed to IPV. An exception is Moms and Teens for Safe Dates (MTSD), an evidence-based ADV prevention program for mothers or maternal caregivers (mothers) exposed to IPV and their teenagers. The MTSD program comprises a series of booklets that families complete together in a home that includes activities to promote positive family communication and healthy teenager relationships. We developed a web-adapted version of the MTSD program-entitled eMoms and Teens for Safe Dates (eMTSD)-to provide a delivery format that may increase program appeal for digitally oriented teenagers, lower dissemination costs, lower reading burden for low-literacy participants, and incorporate built-in cues and reminders to boost program adherence.Entities:
Keywords: adolescents; dating violence; family-based prevention; feasibility and acceptability; mobile phone; web-based delivery
Year: 2022 PMID: 35930332 PMCID: PMC9391968 DOI: 10.2196/35487
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Res Protoc ISSN: 1929-0748
Figure 1Study flow. eMTSD: eMoms and Teens for Safe Dates; IPV: intimate partner violence.
Figure 2eMoms and Teens for Safe Dates conceptual model. ADV: adolescent dating violence.
Figure 3eMTSD program flow. eMTSD: eMoms and Teens for Safe Dates.
Overview of eMoms and Teens for Safe Dates program module goals and sample activities.
| Module and goals | Sample activities | |
|
| ||
|
| Inform mothers about the program structure | Mothers watch an explainer animated video about the program goals and structure |
|
| Motivate mothers’ engagement with the program | Mothers identify challenges they face in talking to their teenagers about dating and listen to narrated clips about how to overcome them |
|
| ||
|
| Identify healthy dating goals | Mothers and teenagers identify qualities they would like in a dating partner |
|
| Improve mother-teenager problem-solving communication | Mothers and teenagers identify positive and negative communication skills used in animated microvideos of everyday family conversations |
|
| ||
|
| Increase emotion regulation skills | Mothers and teenagers identify events and cues that indicate when they are experiencing an escalation of anger and select strategies they can use for self-calming |
|
| Increase positive conflict resolution skills | Mothers and teenagers watch an animated video of a disagreement between dating partners and practice using problem-solving communication to resolve the conflict |
|
| ||
|
| Increase awareness of different forms of dating abuse and their negative consequences | Mothers and teenagers learn about tactics that can be used to control and manipulate dating partners and identify the tactics being used in different abuse scenarios |
|
| Foster discussion of healthy relationship characteristics | Mothers and teenagers identify characteristics of “healthy” relationships among their friends and families and in the media and discuss what makes a relationship “healthy” |
|
| ||
|
| Increase understanding of the meaning of consent in a dating relationship | Mothers and teenagers watch an animated explainer video that highlights the elements of and importance of consent in a dating relationship |
|
| Identify and counter rape myths | Mothers and teenagers read about and discuss false beliefs about sexual dating abuse that shift blame to the victim |
|
| Identify strategies to reduce the risk of experiencing sexual dating abuse | Mothers and teenagers brainstorm strategies they can use to reduce the risk of experiencing sexual dating abuse |
|
| ||
|
| Identify healthy relationship goals | Teenagers identify ways they want to treat dating partners and ways that they want to be treated |
|
| Increase awareness of signs of dating abuse | Mothers and teenagers identify “red flags” that indicate that someone might be experiencing or perpetrating abusive behavior |
|
| Develop safety plans and dating rules | Mothers and teenagers collaboratively develop a set of family guidelines for dating |
Acceptability outcomes.
| Outcome and domain | Indicator or indicators | ||
|
| |||
|
| Affective attitude |
I enjoyed doing the module or programa The module or program kept my attentiona | |
|
| Burden |
The module or program was easy to doa The module or program was too longa | |
|
| Effectiveness |
I learned useful information from the module or programa The program will reduce my teen’s chances of experiencing dating abusea | |
|
| Ethicality |
The program covered topics that are important to mea | |
|
| Cohesiveness |
I understood what the program is trying to doa | |
|
| Self-efficacy |
I understood how to complete the programa | |
|
| Opportunity cost |
Doing the program was time well spenta | |
|
| Overallb |
Percentage of participants who report agreement with all acceptability indicators | |
|
| |||
|
| Effectiveness |
Percentage of participants who report it was helpful to receive text reminders Percentage of participants who report it was helpful to complete an action plan | |
|
| Burden |
Percentage of participants who report they received too many SMS text messages | |
aProgram acceptability indicators will be operationalized as the percentage of participants who completed the module or program and agreed or strongly agreed with the indicator statement. Some indicators will be asked both in reference to specific modules and in reference to the program as a whole.
bWe will also create a continuous program acceptability index score for each mother and teenager by summing across acceptability indicators (range 0-9).
Power for focal binary feasibility and acceptability outcomes.
| Outcome | Red zone upper limit, % | Green zone lower limit, % | Powera, % | Nb |
| Enrollment rate (percentage of those eligible who enroll) | 60 | 75 | 80 | 68 |
| Program acceptability (percentage of those completing the program who agree or strongly that the program is acceptable across all domains) | 55 | 75 | 80 | 40 |
| Teenager program initiation rate (percentage of those enrolled who start the program with their teenager) | 50 | 65 | 80 | 73 |
| Program completion rate (within group; percentage of those assigned to the group who complete all 6 program modules) | 25 | 50 | 80 | 25 (per group; 100 overall) |
aPower (1-B) to reject being in the red zone if the green zone holds true.
bNeeded sample size for the hypothesis test.