| Author, Year | Design | Setting | Objective | Population: Inclusion/Exclusion | Intervention/Comparison | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shattuck, 2011 (24) | RCT | Malawi; Mangochi | To evaluate the effectiveness of peer education intervention based on the information-motivation-behavioral skills (IMB) model on contraceptive use among couples. | 397 men Inclusion: Individuals aged 18-25 years, married or cohabiting with a woman who is not pregnant/breastfeeding a child aged <6 months, no infertility treatment in the past 3 months, no use of modern contraception Intervention population (baseline→endpoint): 197→149 (men) Comparison population (baseline→endpoint): 200→140 (men) Religion: Christian and Muslim |
Intervention: Peer educational intervention on family planning (Malawi Male Motivator Project) [Contents] Home visits (five times) by trained male motivators: providing information on family planning, sharing experiences, motivating, role-playing, and improving communication skills/6 months Comparison: None |
Index: Contraceptive use, knowledge, attitudes, self-esteem, gender norms, communication regarding family planning, communication frequency Assessment: Questionnaire Timepoints: ①baseline ②within 1 month of intervention |
| Schuler, 2015 (25) | cluster-RCT | Guatemala; Sacatepéquez, Chimaltenango, Sololá, Huehuetenango, San Marcos; (rural area) | To investigate the effectiveness of interventions in rural areas where contraceptive coverage is low and family planning needs are unmet compared with urban areas. | 45 communities (15 communities × 3→ a community has gone) Inclusion: Married men or in civil union, wives aged 18-40 years, live in the districts, agreement from both members of couples Intervention population: 597→328 (men and women) Comparison population: 488→213 (men and women) Religion: Catholic 50%-57%, Protestant 31%-38%. |
Intervention: Workshop Session (expressed as “WS” in the following) [Contents] WS by trained local promoters: gender issues presenting barriers to sexual and reproductive health, information and role-play on gender equality and family planning/WS for men × 2, WS for women × 2, WS for couple × 2 Comparison: None |
Index: Gender and Family Planning Equity [GAFPE] Scale: Attitudes toward gender equality, family planning knowledge Assessment: Interview Timepoints: ①baseline ②2 months after baseline |
| Mmbaga, 2017 (26) | cluster-RCT | Tanzania; Kinondoni Municipality | To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to delay the initiation of sexual activity and promote the use of condoms. | 38 schools: 5,091 students Inclusion: Students aged 12-14 years, able to read and write Intervention population: 2,503→2,134 (boys and girls) Comparison population: 2,588→2,236 (boys and girls) Religion: Christian and Muslim, respectively, approximately 50% |
Intervention: Three-component sessions with peers, teachers, and healthcare professionals (PREPARE) [Contents] Teachers: In-class interactive teaching and learning sessions; Peers: one session per week for a total of nine life skills training sessions; health professionals: sessions on accessing sexual and reproductive health services and contraceptive use Comparison: None |
Index: An action plan for sexual activity, sexual initiation, and condom use Assessment: Questionnaire Timepoints: ①baseline ②6 months after intervention (→booster intervention) ③12 months after intervention |
| Fleming, 2018 (27) | cluster-RCT | India; Thane (rural area) | To evaluate the effects of the CHARM intervention on gender ideology and household decision-making. | 50 clusters: 1,081 couples Inclusion: Married men aged 18-30 years, husbands and wives fluent in Marathi, resided together for the past 3 months with no intent to relocate in the next 2 years. Exclusion: couples who report infertility or surgical sterilization exhibiting severe cognitive or health impairment. Intervention population: 469→397 (couples) Comparison population: 612→494 (couples) Religion: Designated tribes were the most common (66.1%). |
Intervention: Counseling on family planning and gender equality (CHARM) [Contents] Counseling sessions with trained village male healthcare providers/sessions (expressed as “S” in the following) for men × 2, S for couple × 1: Providing information on family planning, decision-making related to family planning, gender equality, etc Comparison: Public family planning services |
Index: Gender Equitable Men (GEM) Scale: gender ideology, equitable attitudes toward household decision-making Assessment: Questionnaire Timepoints: ①baseline ②9 months after baseline ③18 months after baseline |
| Waidler, 2022 (28) | cluster-RCT | Tanzania; Mufindi, Mafinga, Busokelo, Rungwe | To examine the impacts of a multicomponent intervention targeted to Tanzanian adolescents on their sexual behaviors and reproductive health. | 130 clusters: 1,993 individuals (1,065 men) Inclusion: All adolescents aged 14-17 in PNNS households (Productive Social Safety Net program [PNNS]; “Cash”), both in and out of school, were included. Intervention population: 1,272→1,128 (boys and girls) Comparison population: 1,186→1,063 (boys and girls). |
Intervention: Cash, livelihood, and life skills training & training on HIV and SRH [Contents] Livelihoods and life skills training, mentoring and asset transfer, strengthening youth-friendly HIV and SRH services: topics on contraception, access to gender services, and gender/sessions with online educational curriculum and breakout rooms Comparison: Cash only |
Index: Contraceptive knowledge, modern contraceptive knowledge, condom use, modern contraceptive use Assessment: Questionnaire Timepoints: ①baseline ②2-3 months after intervention ③17 months after intervention |
| Country | Income class | Population | Fertility rate | Birth rate | Gender gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guatemala (Schuler, 2015) | upper-middle | 16,858 | 2.5 | 22 | 0.664 (113th) |
| India (Fleming, 2018) | lower-middle | 1,396,387 | 2.1 | 17 | 0.629 (135th) |
| Tanzania (Mmbaga, 2017) (Waidler, 2022) |
lower-middle | 61,704 | 4.8 | 37 | 0.719 (64th) |
| Malawi (Shattuck, 2011) | low | 19,377 | 4.0 | 33 | 0.632 (132nd) |
| Outcome | Publication | Impact of intervention | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Waidler, 2022 | Knowledge regarding contraceptives | p ≥ 0.05 |
| Knowledge regarding modern contraceptives | p ≥ 0.05 | ||
| Schuler, 2015 | Family planning knowledge* | p < 0.001 | |
| Shattuck, 2011 | Family planning knowledge | p < 0.05 | |
| Attitude | Mmbaga, 2017 | Action plan to delay sex | p = 0.614 |
| Action plan to use a condom | p = 0.0876 | ||
| Shattuck, 2011 | Family planning attitude | p ≥ 0.05 | |
| Self-efficacy | p ≥ 0.05 | ||
| General communication | p ≥ 0.05 | ||
| Communication frequency* | p < 0.05 | ||
| Practice | Waidler, 2022 | Used a condom during last sexual encounter | p ≥ 0.05 |
| Currently using contraceptives (among sexually active) | p ≥ 0.05 | ||
| Currently using modern contraceptives (among sexually active) | p ≥ 0.05 | ||
| Mmbaga, 2017 | Sexual initiation* | p = 0.043 | |
| Condom use* | p = 0.004 | ||
| Shattuck, 2011 | Contraceptive uptake* | p < 0.05 | |
| Gender Dynamics | Fleming, 2018 | Sex ideology | p ≥ 0.05 |
| Equitable attitudes toward household decision-making* | p < 0.01 (9 months) p ≥ 0.05 (18 months) |
||
| Schuler, 2015 | Sexual attitudes* | p = 0.002 | |
| Shattuck, 2011 | Sexual norms | p ≥ 0.05 |
