Search

Despite national guidelines advocating a comprehensive, age-appropriate, and sequential approach to sexual health education in schools, many young people in the USA do not receive sexual health information until high school. To date, there has been little research on the need for a supplemental round of sexual health education – a 'booster' – later in adolescence to reinforce and expand upon information and skills previously provided. In rural California, we conducted six focus groups with young people (N = 22, ages 14–20) and key informant interviews with youth-serving professionals (N = 10) to examine the sexual health education needs of youth as they complete high school. Five themes were identified, indicating a need for booster education that 1) reinforces existing sexual health knowledge; 2) expands beyond traditional areas of sexual health education; 3) addresses community stigma about adolescent health; and 4) prepares young people for the transition to adulthood. In addition, booster education should 5) be established within the school system to promote an environment that addresses and normalises health issues throughout the school year. Providing booster sexual health education may meet critical gaps in efforts to support the healthy sexual development of young people, especially those living in rural communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the politicization of abortion, professionals working in U.S. health departments (HDs) may not be receptive to communications about abortion, despite often regulating abortion facilities. This paper reports results of a randomized, prospective, observational study to test the effects of e-mail language when disseminating evidence on abortion to HD professionals. Our sample was 302 HD employees who oversee healthcare facilities inspection/regulation in all 50 U.S. state HDs, clustered by HD and randomized into two study groups. In November–December 2019, we sent biweekly e-mails containing links to a website summarizing evidence on abortion facility regulation. E-mails/headers sent to one group emphasized public health values and did not include the word abortion; e-mails/headers to the other group used the word abortion. Primary outcome measures were e-mail open rates and click-through rates. Among 221 participants to whom e-mails were deliverable, the overall open rate was 36%. Open rate was 25% for PH values and 46% for abortion groups (p <.05). Effects were moderated by state abortion policy environment: in both supportive and restrictive environments, participants in the abortion messaging group were statistically more likely to open e-mails than those in the PH values group. There was no difference between groups in states with middle-ground abortion policy environments. Among participants opening at least one e-mail, 19% clicked through to the website, with no significant difference by group. This study demonstrates that repeated targeted e-mail campaigns can reach HD professionals with research summaries. Concerns that communications to HDs should avoid the word abortion are unsupported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]