Insights and Evidence Gaps in Girl-Centered Programming: A Systematic Review

Increased attention to the needs of adolescent girls has led to a growing number of programs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Questions remain, however, about what aspects of program design are most effective. This hinders efforts to effectively allocate resources, scale-up programs, and replicate results across settings. To address these issues, we conducted a systematic review to identify lessons learned and gaps in the evidence base.

KEY FINDINGS

1. Multicomponent programs tended to outperform single-component programs, although few studies controlled for duration of exposure to the intervention. There were too few studies to draw conclusions about the durability of program effects over time.

2. Longer program exposure improved program effectiveness and may contribute to the durability of program effects over time, although selection bias was a limitation in a number of studies.

3. Evidence on whether multilevel interventions enhance benefits for girls relative to single-level interventions was inconclusive. No identified studies assessed the relative effect of booster “add-ons” (versus no booster) or varied the saturation level of the program in communities.

4. Few evaluations of girl-centered programs to date have rigorously addressed implementation science questions, highlighting a robust and urgent research agenda for the future.