College students' experiences of sexual violence and reasons for seeking care in campus health and counseling centers.

OBJECTIVE: Examine associations between care seeking reasons in college health and counseling centers and sexual violence (SV). PARTICIPANTS: College students (n = 2,084 baseline, n = 1,170 one-year follow up) participating in a cluster randomized controlled trial of an SV reduction intervention on 28 campuses. METHODS: Computer-based survey data gathered during students' clinic visit and one-year follow up. RESULTS: Despite high prevalence of SV, students almost never sought care specifically for SV (0.5% of reported visits). Gender differences emerged for reasons students sought care generally, but were not associated with differences in care seeking among those who experienced SV. At baseline and one-year, students who reported SV were more likely to state mental or sexual and reproductive health as their reason for care seeking. CONCLUSION: Many students seeking care have experienced SV yet present with other health needs. Providers need to recognize this and have a low threshold for providing SV resources routinely.

Provider perspectives on implementing a student health and counseling center intervention for sexual violence.

Objective: To describe provider experiences with implementation of the GIFTSS (Giving Information for Trauma Support and Safety) intervention. Participants: Health and counseling center staff from participating campuses attended trainings between August 2015 and August 2016. Interviews were conducted between May and August 2017. Methods: Providers (n = 230) completed surveys prior to and six months following a 3-hour training on the intervention. Structured phone interviews were conducted with a purposively selected subset of 14 providers. Results: Overall, staff found the intervention acceptable. Implementation barriers noted were time and competing patient priorities. Providers noted variation based on patient and visit characteristics. Clinic commitment, particularly in adopting strategies for universal dissemination of the GIFTSS card, was seen as helpful. Conclusion: Implementation of a brief trauma-informed intervention in campus health and counseling centers was feasible and acceptable to most providers. Opportunities to change organizational culture regarding ensuring adequate time and safety for patients are discussed.

Perceptions of College Campus Alcohol and Sexual Violence Prevention Among Students with Disabilities: "It Was A Joke".

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to understand perceptions of campus-based alcohol and sexual violence (SV) prevention programming among college students with disabilities to inform future development of prevention programs appropriate for the needs of these students. METHOD: The study included semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 51 college students with disabilities who reported histories of SV recruited from a larger parent study investigating a brief universal intervention to reduce alcohol related SV involving 28 campuses across Western Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Interviews focused on college-related experiences of prevention programming, and experiences of health, disability, alcohol use and violence victimization. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: (1) Students with disabilities described campus prevention programming as ineffective and irrelevant to their experiences, including referring to programs as "a joke," (2) Students wanted multi-dose, developmentally relevant content that directly addresses the complexities of their experiences with disability, alcohol, and violence, and (3) Students called for programing focused on engaging their interests. CONCLUSIONS: Our results point to the need to augment campus-based programming, with attention to the unique needs and relevant concerns of students with disabilities, within the broader context of campus prevention programming.

Campus Service Use Among Students With Disabilities Who Have Experienced Sexual Violence: A Conceptual Model.

Students with disabilities are one student group with elevated risk of sexual violence. Although they would benefit from streamlined access to campus support, little is known about their patterns of campus service use. This qualitative analysis includes data from semi-structured interviews with 51 students with disabilities who experienced sexual violence focused on service use across campus. The resultant conceptual model shows that greater accessibility is associated with positive experiences, and lower accessibility is associated with negative experiences. Students with disabilities who experienced or expected negative reactions (e.g., judgment) were less likely to use services and were less satisfied. Advocacy and support in connecting students with disability or sexual violence services was associated with positive experiences and increased accessibility. These findings highlight key facilitators and barriers to campus service use for students with disabilities with sexual violence histories and suggest key intervention points for increasing accessibility, reducing stigma, and improving student experiences with campus providers, staff, and faculty.

Effect of a Community-Based Gender Norms Program on Sexual Violence Perpetration by Adolescent Boys and Young Men: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Engaging adolescent boys and young men in preventing violence against women is a potentially impactful public health strategy. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a community-based, gender-transformative program (ie, Manhood 2.0) on perpetration of gender-based violence by adolescent boys and young men. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this unblinded cluster randomized clinical trial, neighborhoods were designated as the unit of clustering (1:1 allocation). Three-month (ie, time point 2 [T2]) and 9-month (ie, time point 3 [T3]) follow-ups were conducted. The trial took place in 20 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, neighborhoods and 1 centrally located site with concentrated disadvantage. Pittsburgh-based adolescent boys and young men (ages 13 to 19 years) were recruited between July 27, 2015, and June 5, 2017, through youth-serving organizations and community-based alternatives to residential placement for juvenile justice-involved youth. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted from June 2018 to November 2019. Interventions: Manhood 2.0, an international program adapted for adolescent boys and young men in US urban communities, encourages these individuals to challenge gender norms that foster violence against women and unhealthy sexual relationships. Individuals in the control population received job-readiness training. Each program was 18 hours. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in participant-level perpetration of sexual violence (SV) or adolescent relationship abuse (ARA) at T3. Results: Among 866 participants, 465 individuals (54%) enrolled in 11 intervention clusters and 401 individuals (46%) enrolled in 10 control clusters. In the intervention group, 325 participants (70%) were analyzed at T2 and 334 participants (72%) were analyzed at T3; in the control group, 262 participants (65%) were analyzed at T2 and 301 participants (75%) were analyzed at T3. Mean (SD) age was 15.5 (1.6) years; 609 participants (70%) self-identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 178 (20%) self-identified as Hispanic, multiracial, or other race/ethnicity other than White. Among individuals in the intervention group, 296 participants (64%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at baseline, and 173 participants (52%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at T3. Among individuals in the control group, 213 participants (53%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at baseline, and 124 participants (41%) reported any SV or ARA perpetration at T3). The difference in reduction between groups was not significant. There was no evidence of an intervention effect for the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.32; 95% CI, 0.86-2.01; P = .20). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings from this evaluation of a community-based gender-transformative program for adolescent boys and young men did not show a significant intervention effect in reducing SV or ARA perpetration between Manhood 2.0 and a job-readiness control program. Combining gender-transformative approaches with job-readiness programs may be relevant for violence prevention in low-resource urban settings. Attention to improving implementation and strategies to sustain such community-based efforts are needed. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02427061.

Engendering healthy masculinities to prevent sexual violence: Rationale for and design of the Manhood 2.0 trial.

Violence against women and girls is an important global health concern. Numerous health organizations highlight engaging men and boys in preventing violence against women as a potentially impactful public health prevention strategy. Adapted from an international setting for use in the US, "Manhood 2.0" is a "gender transformative" program that involves challenging harmful gender and sexuality norms that foster violence against women while promoting bystander intervention (i.e., giving boys skills to interrupt abusive behaviors they witness among peers) to reduce the perpetration of sexual violence (SV) and adolescent relationship abuse (ARA). Manhood 2.0 is being rigorously evaluated in a community-based cluster-randomized trial in 21 lower resource Pittsburgh neighborhoods with 866 adolescent males ages 13-19. The comparison intervention is a job readiness training program which focuses on the skills needed to prepare youth for entering the workforce, including goal setting, accountability, resume building, and interview preparation. This study will provide urgently needed information about the effectiveness of a gender transformative program, which combines healthy sexuality education, gender norms change, and bystander skills to interrupt peers' disrespectful and harmful behaviors to reduce SV/ARA perpetration among adolescent males. In this manuscript, we outline the rationale for and evaluation design of Manhood 2.0. Clinical Trials #: NCT02427061.