Impact of a Text-Messaging Program on Adolescent Reproductive Health: A Cluster–Randomized Trial in Ghana
Open accessAbstract
Objectives. To evaluate whether text-messaging programs can improve reproductive health among adolescent girls in low- and middle-income countries. Methods. We conducted a cluster–randomized controlled trial among 756 female students aged 14 to 24 years in Accra, Ghana, in 2014. We randomized 38 schools to unidirectional intervention (n = 12), interactive intervention (n = 12), and control (n = 14). The unidirectional intervention sent participants text messages with reproductive health information. The interactive intervention engaged adolescents in text-messaging reproductive health quizzes. The primary study outcome was reproductive health knowledge at 3 and 15 months. Additional outcomes included self-reported pregnancy and sexual behavior. Analysis was by intent-to-treat. Results. From baseline to 3 months, the unidirectional intervention increased knowledge by 11 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 7, 15) and the interactive intervention by 24 percentage points (95% CI = 19, 28), from a control baseline of 26%. Although we found no changes in reproductive health outcomes overall, both unidirectional (odds ratio [OR] = 0.14; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.71) and interactive interventions (OR = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.86) lowered odds of self-reported pregnancy for sexually active participants. Conclusions. Text-messaging programs can lead to large improvements in reproductive health knowledge and have the potential to lower pregnancy risk for sexually active adolescent girls.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Maternal health was the most prevalent health outcome, with a frequency of 9 out of 30 articles (30%).
“Among the articles analyzed, maternal health was the most prevalent health outcome with a frequency of 9 out of the 30 articles (30%) [27-35].”
From Barriers to the Use of Mobile Health in Improving Health Outcomes in Developing Countries: Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [28]
The use of SMS only was mentioned in 16 of 26 interventions (62%).
“The use of SMS only was mentioned in 16 of 26 interventions (62%) [28-31,35,37,38,40-43,45-47,50,52].”
From Barriers to the Use of Mobile Health in Improving Health Outcomes in Developing Countries: Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [28]
SMS has the potential to make patients feel supported, encouraged, and aware, helping them take better care of themselves and continue treatment.
“SMS has the potential to make patients feel supported, encouraged, and aware, thus helping them take better care of themselves and continue treatment [28].”
From Barriers to the Use of Mobile Health in Improving Health Outcomes in Developing Countries: Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [28]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 94
- Authors
- Rokicki, S., Cohen, J., Salomon, J. A., & Fink, G.
- Affiliations
- University College Dublin (IE)
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 2017-02
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 298-305
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- PMC
- PMC5227930
- OpenAlex
- W2564738437
- Cited by
- 94
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 12.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Research Repository UCD (University College Dublin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Harvard University
- Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University
- University of Ghana
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Keywords
- text messaging, adolescent reproductive health, adolescent girls, reproductive health knowledge, contraception, sexual behavior, school-based intervention, mobile health, low- and middle-income countries
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Female, Ghana, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Patient Education as Topic, Pregnancy, Pregnancy in Adolescence, Sex Education, Young Adult, Text Messaging, Reproductive Health
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review