Clinical Question
The object of our study is the issue of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among adolescents. Many scholars have researched the level of teenagers’ knowledge of the threat presented by STDs (Ezeokoli, Ayodele, & Olaleye, 2014; Trejos-Castillo, Treviño-Schafer, Brice, & McPherson, 2011). Other researchers (Kottke et al., 2015) have suggested protection methods for youngsters.
In compliance with the object of the study, the null hypothesis of the current research states that young people are expected to avoid sex rather than engage in safe sexual activity. This hypothesis is based on psychological factors and peer pressure (Ezeokoli et al., 2014). The researcher’s goal is to prove that there is a positive correlation between teenagers who engage in safe sex and those who received the clinical intervention.
Proceeding from the object of the study, the clinical question is, “Will adolescents who receive clinical intervention most likely engage in safe sex or avoid sex compared with a group who did not receive such a response?” The researcher is going to utilize interviews and explanatory conversations throughout the research as the main methodology (Harden, 2014). This approach is supposed to minimize the occurrence of unprotected teenage sex. The researcher expects to find that teenagers are aware of the issues connected to unprotected sex and realize the gravity of the consequences. The interviews will be conducted with each of the interviewees separately to provide teenagers with security and confidence, which are necessary to obtain marginally unbiased data concerning unsafe sex occurrence. Explanatory conversations shall be supported by a finalizing survey, which would include questions relating to their attitude toward unsafe sex and the likelihood of avoiding sex at all rather than engaging in unprotected sexual intercourse.
Intervention
Scholars have proved the positive results of intervention programs related to sex education (Akers, Gold, Coyne-Beasley, & Corbie-Smith, 2012; Harden, 2014). Our program is a sexual education project for adolescents aged fifteen and over. It is a one-hour class for one week. In this program, they will receive information about STDs and their nature and extent, and the risk of STDs, as well as the benefits of safe sex practices, such as the use of condoms and fidelity of the couple. The intervention includes a survey to assess the behavior of the subjects and the responses of a group of adolescents who did not receive the intervention.
The study will be performed using the fishbowl method and will involve the participation of students from two schools from the Miami-Dade Country. These schools will be labeled as the experimental group and the control group. Before introducing the intervention, the proponent will administer John Cleland’s “Illustrative Questionnaire for Interview-Surveys with Young People” (Word Health Organization, 2016) to assess the participants’ knowledge and attitude toward sex and reproductive health. The experiment group will receive a one-hour, after-class Sex Education Class Program for a month. The control group will go about their regular schedule without any form of information being passed to them about the course that the other group of teenagers is taking.
After the completion of the program, the experimental group and the control group will be asked to take the same test again. All of the participants will be asked to write the number they were given when they took the test the first time. The results of the first and the second tests will be compared to document any changes or improvements in the participants’ knowledge and attitude toward reproductive health.
Outcomes and Their Analysis
The outcomes of the study will be represented by the teenagers’ answers to the questions. The researcher will also evaluate the divergences between the initial and the final questionnaire results. The analysis of the outcomes will be used to refute the null hypothesis and present the novel findings of the study.
We will analyze the results in several steps. First, we will assess the results of the initial part of the experiment: John Cleland’s “Illustrative Questionnaire for Interview-Surveys with Young People” (Word Health Organization, 2016). After the implementation of the intervention program, we will give the teenagers the same test once again and analyze the results by comparing those of the experimental group to those of the control group. Besides the general results, we will draw separate results charts concerning the participants’ age, sex, and ethnicity. We will scrutinize the differences between male and female actors’ results, between younger and older teenagers, and between various ethnic representatives. This will provide material for finding out the different approaches to reproductive health knowledge and attitude by the corresponding groups.
Statistical Analysis
This statistical analysis is in compliance with the null hypothesis, and the researcher expects to see a positive dependence tendency in those teenagers who received the clinical intervention. It is important to link the null hypothesis to the statistical analysis because more and more teenagers disregard the dangers of an unprotected sexual activity, and the number of teenagers who suffer from sexually transmitted diseases is growing steadily (Ezeokoli et al., 2014). The analysis is expected to show a positive correlation between the null hypothesis and the outcomes of the study.
The researcher believes that the findings of the research will support the null hypothesis. This postulation is based on the extensive examination of background literature on the subject (Harden, 2014). After the clinical interventions and interviews/ surveys are conducted, the current statistical analysis is intended to help the investigator compare the outcomes in the teenagers who tended to avoid unsafe sexual intercourse and the teenagers who ignored the risks of unprotected sex (Harden, 2014).
The test will be collected using a paper-and-pencil testing methodology. The participants will be asked not to write any identifying marker on their questionnaires, as any marker will invalidate the paper. Baseline evidence will be collected before the intervention to determine the participants’ existing knowledge and attitude toward sex and reproductive health (Ezeokoli et al., 2014). After the intervention, the group will then be asked to retake the test for comparison.
The statistical analysis of our data will involve gathering and examining all the data samples related to the data collection tools. Thus, we will have two sets of samples: the pre-intervention and post-intervention results. We shall characterize the nature of the obtained data to check the integrity and correctness of the evidence. Another key objective is to search for the relation of the data to the target population to define key variations in the samples (Ezeokoli et al., 2014). The latter would overtly assist in working out scenarios for future operations and interventions.
In this research, clinical intervention is the independent variable. This characteristic is chosen as the independent variable because the researcher can practically control it. Moreover, it will be profitable in terms of detecting the variations in the teenagers’ behavior. The dependent variable, in this case, is the teenagers’ awareness of sexually transmitted diseases and engagement in unsafe sexual activity (Harden, 2014). This characteristic has been chosen as the dependent variable since the effect of the clinical intervention can be explicitly seen in young people. The obviousness of the outcomes makes the teenagers’ engagement in sexual activity the best option (Ezeokoli et al., 2014).
Demographic Data
The demographic data collected during the study will include the participants’ age, sex, and ethnicity. This data will then be analyzed to find out the divergences in the knowledge about sexually transmitted diseases and the ways of preventing them between male and female teenagers. Also, we will be able to see whose attitudes will have changed more after the intervention program: those of the boys or the girls (Harden, 2014). The data collected about the participants’ age will be used to determine the average age for having the first sexual experience and the age at which teenagers start having intercourse regularly.
The information about the teenagers’ ethnicity will show the differences in the experience between youngsters of various ethnic origins (Ezeokoli et al., 2014). The demographic data that will be obtained throughout the research will also be used to identify psychosocial trends that might be inherent in the sample. The latter would highly increase the chances of finding novel ways to confront the unawareness, which is currently present in the majority of teenagers. This would ultimately help the researcher connect the null hypothesis to the dependent and independent variables, identify and explain the present functional dependencies, and interpret the outcomes of the study correctly (Ezeokoli et al., 2014).
Expected Outcomes
The intervention program aims to affect teenagers’ attitudes toward sexually transmitted diseases. It will measure the participants’ scope of knowledge concerning the problem and will later show how this range can be enlarged with the help of the experimental project.
Should this project be implemented, we expect that the intervention program outcomes will be beneficial for the youngsters and expand the participants’ knowledge about STDs. We suppose that the experimental group, which is going to receive a Sex Education Class Program for a month, will be much more aware of the dangers presented by unprotected sex and of the ways of making their sexual relationships safer. We predict that in comparison to the control group, the experimental group will be more concerned about the issue of sexually transmitted diseases.
This intervention program is expected to function in compliance with the null hypothesis and support the investigator’s supposition. The researcher will prove that there is a correlation between a clinical intervention and increased safe sex awareness among teenagers. The hypothesis that there is a relationship between safe sex and clinical intervention is also expected to be confirmed.
The results of the experiment are expected to prove the exceptional benefits of a Sex Education intervention program. We hope that with the results being positive, more schools will consider implementing similar programs for teenagers’ health and safety.
References
Akers, A., Gold, M., Coyne-Beasley, T., & Corbie-Smith, G. (2012). A qualitative study of rural black adolescents’ perspectives on primary STD prevention strategies. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 44(2), 92-99. Web.
Ezeokoli, R., Ayodele, K., & Olaleye, Y. (2014). Adolescents’ knowledge and attitude towards regular healthcare as a way of improving HIV/STD testing and treatment. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 6(3). Web.
Harden, K. P. (2014). A sex-positive framework for research on adolescent sexuality. Perspective on Psychological Science, 9(5), 455-469.
Kottke, M., Whiteman, M., Kraft, J., Goedken, P., Wiener, J., Kourtis, A., & DiClemente, A. (2015). Use of dual methods for protection from unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases in adolescent African American women. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, 28, 543-548.
Trejos-Castillo, E., Treviño-Schafer, N., Brice, L., & McPherson, K. (2011). Teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections in youth: a community prevention evidence-based program in Texas, USA. Revista CES Psicología, 25-38.
Word Health Organization. (2016). Illustrative questionnaire for interview-surveys with young people. Web.