That any letters were posted. Nevertheless, personal information may have been discovered by others (even without identity information). A more secure way should be found to ensure that letters are only seen by the research team. Emptying the mailboxes more regularly might also be important. The mailbox technique took place in schools where a larger study on the effectiveness of peer education as a tool for HIV prevention and SRH ALS-8176MedChemExpress ALS-8176 promotion of youth was planned. Even though the study was initiated before the start of the intervention, the Isorhamnetin msds baseline survey already took place and it might possibly have influenced the content of the letters. The study did generate a large number of stories related to sexuality of young people. However, the majority of the letters described young people in general and did not always include personal stories. This might be solved by asking a more direct, personal question or asking respondents to describe a recent personal experience. A less threatening way may be to propose a limited number of themes they can write about. If describing personal experiences is too sensitive, another option would be to ask them to write down recent conversations between peers on the topic (Swidler Watkins 2007; Watkins Swidler 2009). There is no control over the selection of the participants. Therefore, this technique is preferably done in a relatively homogenous group. Participation bias, e.g. that older and more extrovert students are more likely to write, cannot be excluded. Nevertheless, we believe the mailbox method to be a valuable tool for qualitative research. It allows participants to decide for themselves if they want to take part in the study (voluntary). They can participate when they want, over a long period in time. The method should assure that no co-participant, or in the case of our study, no teachers or fellow student, can access the information (confidential). The participants decide for themselves if they want to make themselves known (anonymous). And, mostRecommendations for SRH promotion interventionsThe vulnerability of young people is determined by a complex interrelated web of mutually reinforcing factors. These factors carry different weights for different individuals and groups and in different situations. An intervention that takes into account these aspects is more likely to succeed than an intervention that targets just one or several aspects. As the letters demonstrate that young people who are sexually active still have many questions on sexuality issues and safe sexual behaviour, we would recommend that SRH promotion interventions target younger children with key messages on sexuality and relationships, before the complex physical and emotional process of sexual identity construction starts. Next to prevention messages for larger groups, the vulnerability of young people ?prone to peer pressure and doubt ?calls for an individual approach. Young people have many questions,VOL. 11 NO. 1Journal des Aspects Sociaux du VIH/SIDAOriginal Articleimportantly, the participants are in charge of the topic discussed, allowing the researchers to find out what is really on their minds (participant-initiated). Furthermore, the method is low cost. An advised adaptation would be a shorter time span to write the letters (for example, over a month with weekly collection of letters).ConclusionWe can make conclusions on four major points. First, current efforts are not sufficient for young people. They still hav.That any letters were posted. Nevertheless, personal information may have been discovered by others (even without identity information). A more secure way should be found to ensure that letters are only seen by the research team. Emptying the mailboxes more regularly might also be important. The mailbox technique took place in schools where a larger study on the effectiveness of peer education as a tool for HIV prevention and SRH promotion of youth was planned. Even though the study was initiated before the start of the intervention, the baseline survey already took place and it might possibly have influenced the content of the letters. The study did generate a large number of stories related to sexuality of young people. However, the majority of the letters described young people in general and did not always include personal stories. This might be solved by asking a more direct, personal question or asking respondents to describe a recent personal experience. A less threatening way may be to propose a limited number of themes they can write about. If describing personal experiences is too sensitive, another option would be to ask them to write down recent conversations between peers on the topic (Swidler Watkins 2007; Watkins Swidler 2009). There is no control over the selection of the participants. Therefore, this technique is preferably done in a relatively homogenous group. Participation bias, e.g. that older and more extrovert students are more likely to write, cannot be excluded. Nevertheless, we believe the mailbox method to be a valuable tool for qualitative research. It allows participants to decide for themselves if they want to take part in the study (voluntary). They can participate when they want, over a long period in time. The method should assure that no co-participant, or in the case of our study, no teachers or fellow student, can access the information (confidential). The participants decide for themselves if they want to make themselves known (anonymous). And, mostRecommendations for SRH promotion interventionsThe vulnerability of young people is determined by a complex interrelated web of mutually reinforcing factors. These factors carry different weights for different individuals and groups and in different situations. An intervention that takes into account these aspects is more likely to succeed than an intervention that targets just one or several aspects. As the letters demonstrate that young people who are sexually active still have many questions on sexuality issues and safe sexual behaviour, we would recommend that SRH promotion interventions target younger children with key messages on sexuality and relationships, before the complex physical and emotional process of sexual identity construction starts. Next to prevention messages for larger groups, the vulnerability of young people ?prone to peer pressure and doubt ?calls for an individual approach. Young people have many questions,VOL. 11 NO. 1Journal des Aspects Sociaux du VIH/SIDAOriginal Articleimportantly, the participants are in charge of the topic discussed, allowing the researchers to find out what is really on their minds (participant-initiated). Furthermore, the method is low cost. An advised adaptation would be a shorter time span to write the letters (for example, over a month with weekly collection of letters).ConclusionWe can make conclusions on four major points. First, current efforts are not sufficient for young people. They still hav.
