Skip to main content

Seventeen Days (formerly What Could You Do?)

Study Findings

Evidence by Outcome Domain and Study

Citation Sexual Activity Number of Sexual Partners Contraceptive Use STIs or HIV Pregnancy

Downs et al. 2004

A mix of positive, null, and/or adverse impacts across the outcomes examined in this domain Uniformly null impacts across the outcomes examined in this domain A mix of positive, null, and/or adverse impacts across the outcomes examined in this domain

Eichner et al. 2015

Downs et al. 2016

Uniformly null impacts across the outcomes examined in this domain Uniformly null impacts across the outcomes examined in this domain
Top

Detailed Findings

CitationDetails

Downs et al. 2004

The program was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial conducted in four clinic-based healthcare sites in Pittsburgh, PA. Adolescents participating in the study were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) a treatment group that watched the intervention video, (2) a control group that received the same information from the video but as a book, and (3) a control group that received commercially-available brochures on STD risk. Study data were collected with surveys administered immediately before the intervention and at follow-ups conducted 3 and 6 months after the intervention ended. Biological testing for chlamydia was conducted at the 6-month follow-up.

Three months after the program ended, participants who watched the intervention video were more likely to report having been abstinent in the past three months. In addition, six months after the program ended, participants who watched the intervention video were less likely to report having been diagnosed with an STD. The study found no statistically significant program impacts on rates of abstinence in the past three months, self-reported condom use in the past three months, or the biological tests for chlamydia at the 6-month follow-up.

The study also examined program impacts on measures of STD knowledge and self-reported condom failures. Findings for those outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review.

Eichner et al. 2015

Downs et al. 2016

A more recent study evaluated the program using a randomized controlled trial that involved 1,317 young women who sought treatment at health clinics in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. The young women participating in the study were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that watched a 2.5 hours video with the Seventeen Days program content, or to a control group that watched a video providing information on how to reduce driving risks, the Driving Skills for Life video. The study administered surveys immediately before random assignment (baseline), and again three and six months after the baseline.

Three and six months after the baseline, the study found no evidence of statistically significant program impacts on rates of abstinence, defined as not having vaginal sex in the last three months, and on rates of safe sexual behavior, defined as either abstaining from vaginal sex or as having sex using a condom every time in the last three months.

The study also examined program impacts on measures of pregnancy and having an STI. Findings for those outcomes were not considered for the review because they did not meet the review standards. Specifically, attrition for the sample on which those outcomes were measured was high and therefore those findings received a Moderate rating. That rating is not consistent with the overall rating of the study (High). Attrition was assessed separately for the pregnancy and STI tests because they were administered in a different data collection effort–vaginal swab tests kits-- than the surveys used to measure abstinence and contraceptive use at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups.

Top

Notes

Some study entries may include more than one citation because each citation examines a different follow-up period from the same study sample, or because each citation examines a different set of outcome measures on the same study sample. A blank cell indicates the study did not examine any outcome measures within the particular outcome domain or the findings for the outcome measures within that domain did not meet the review evidence standards.

Information on evidence of effectiveness is available only for studies that received a high or moderate rating. Read the description of the review process for more information on how these programs are identified.

Top