School-based programmes for preventing smoking

Thomas, Roger E.; McLellan, Julie; Perera, Rafael

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001293.pub3

Cited by 320 publications

(268 citation statements)

References 537 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

255

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence in the literature to support the use of community venues and schools for health outreach or opportunistic screening programmes 9,10 .In a systematic review, Jamil et al 14 showed that educational venues are feasible settings for identifying and treating students for chlamydia, and that classroom-based interventions seemed to have higher identification and treatment completion rates. In the UK, the national Chlamydia screening programme has successfully implemented screening in various school and college settings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Latent tuberculous screening of recent migrants attending language classes: a cohort study and cost analysis

Usdin

Dedicoat

Gajraj³

et al. 2017

int j tuberc lung dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary :Setting: A key recommendation of the National TB Strategy for England is testing and treatment of latent Tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among new migrants. Programmatic testing is based in primary care; however, this may be inaccessible to some individuals. Current strategies therefore could be complemented with screening in other settings.Objective: To investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of LTBI screening in a community college.Design: We performed a cohort study, based on observational data collected during and after the pilot project. Eligible language students from high TB incidence countries were consented and tested with a single-step Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA) and enrolled in the cohort. We used single and multivariable analyses to estimate effectiveness of LTBI screening and to explore effectiveness in different sub-groups.Results: Screening uptake was 75% and the treatment completion rate was 85%. 71/440 students (16%) were LTBI positive and two had active TB. There was an association of positivity with age and TB incidence in the country of origin. We included costs from a UK National Health Service perspective. Three potential TB incidence thresholds met our cost effectiveness criteria for screening: countries with incidences of more than 40, more than 100 and more than 200 per 100,000 plus students from sub-Saharan Africa. Conclusion:We found that LTBI screening can be offered effectively in a community college setting, and could be a feasible complement to primary care-based programmes in low-incidence countries.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Educational settings have been used successfully for screening other infectious diseases, such as HIV 15 and for smoking cessation initiatives 10 . Colleges also have been used for screening for active TB although there is less literature on LTBI screening initiatives in such venues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Latent tuberculous screening of recent migrants attending language classes: a cohort study and cost analysis

Usdin

Dedicoat

Gajraj³

et al. 2017

int j tuberc lung dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[20][21][22][23][24] The reviews suggest that the following smoking prevention methods and approaches are effective: reducing the illicit sale of tobacco products to under-18s; [20][21][22][23] initiating tobacco-free policies and environmental change; 22 age-appropriate, interactive educational messages delivered via intensive, long-term mass media campaigns; 21 and social competency and skills development interventions to support young people to resist peer influence. Systematic reviews also consistently find that 'multilevel' interventions, which address both individual and environmental determinants of behaviour simultaneously, are most effective for improving young people's health outcomes.…”

Section: Effective Smoking Prevention Methods and Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pilot trial and process evaluation of a multilevel smoking prevention intervention in further education settings

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Preventing smoking uptake among young people is a public health priority. Further education (FE) settings provide access to the majority of 16- to 18-year-olds, but few evaluations of smoking prevention interventions have been reported in this context to date. Objectives To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of implementing and trialling a new multilevel smoking prevention intervention in FE settings. Design Pilot cluster randomised controlled trial and process evaluation. Setting Six UK FE institutions. Participants FE students aged 16–18 years. Intervention ‘The Filter FE’ intervention. Staff working on Action on Smoking and Health Wales’ ‘The Filter’ youth project applied existing staff training, social media and youth work resources in three intervention settings, compared with three control sites with usual practice. The intervention aimed to prevent smoking uptake by restricting the sale of tobacco to under-18s in local shops, implementing tobacco-free campus policies, training FE staff to deliver smoke-free messages, publicising The Filter youth project’s online advice and support services, and providing educational youth work activities. Main outcome measures (1) The primary outcome assessed was the feasibility and acceptability of delivering and trialling the intervention. (2) Qualitative process data were analysed to explore student, staff and intervention team experiences of implementing and trialling the intervention. (3) Primary, secondary and intermediate (process) outcomes and economic evaluation methods were piloted. Data sources New students at participating FE settings were surveyed in September 2014 and followed up in September 2015. Qualitative process data were collected via interviews with FE college managers (n = 5) and the intervention team (n = 6); focus groups with students (n = 11) and staff (n = 5); and observations of intervention settings. Other data sources were semistructured observations of intervention delivery, intervention team records, ‘mystery shopper’ audits of local shops and college policy documents. Results The intervention was not delivered as planned at any of the three intervention settings, with no implementation of some community- and college-level components, and low fidelity of the social media component across sites. Staff training reached 28 staff and youth work activities were attended by 190 students across the three sites (< 10% of all eligible staff and students), with low levels of acceptability reported. Implementation was limited by various factors, such as uncertainty about the value of smoking prevention activities in FE colleges, intervention management weaknesses and high turnover of intervention staff. It was feasible to recruit, randomise and retain FE settings. Prevalence of weekly smoking at baseline was 20.6% and was 17.2% at follow-up, with low levels of missing data for all pilot outcomes. Limitations Only 17% of eligible students participated in baseline and follow-up surveys; the representativeness of student and staff focus groups is uncertain. Conclusions In this study, FE settings were not a supportive environment for smoking prevention activities because of their non-interventionist institutional cultures promoting personal responsibility. Weaknesses in intervention management and staff turnover also limited implementation. Managers accept randomisation but methodological work is required to improve student recruitment and retention rates if trials are to be conducted in FE settings. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19563136. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 5, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. It was also funded by the Big Lottery Fund.

show abstract

“…Many countries have already reported on the effects of education on youth [9] [10] [11] [12], with a reduced smoking rate and developed awareness of avoiding smoking verified as a result of educational intervention [13]. In Japan, smoking is legally allowed over 20 years of age, but the current SPEP is provided in almost all elementary schools from third grade.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Family Environment Factors to Impact on the Effect of the Smoking Prevention Educational Program for Elementary and Junior High School Students

Okuda¹,

Okada²,

Tanioka³

et al. 2018

Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smoking is a major health problem in many countries. It has been reported on the effects of education on youth with a reduced smoking rate and developed awareness of avoiding smoking verified as a result of educational intervention. The aim of this study was to verify the relationship between sex, school age, and family smoking and the effectiveness of smoking prevention education program (SPEP) as factors that impact the effectiveness of SPEP in elementary school and junior high school students. The participants in this survey were 6676 students, who attended elementary and junior high schools in Tokushima Prefecture between 2011 and 2015, and attended the SPEP. As factors that influence the effectiveness of the SPEP, we examined school types, sex, smokers in the family. Participants were asked the following questions before and after the SPEP to measure awareness of and attitudes toward smoking: "intention not to smoke cigarettes as adults", "intention to refuse cigarettes when offered", "attitude of staying away from smokers", and "desire that their family will not smoke". The number of survey collected was 6676, with effective responses from 5974 (90%). Among the 5974, there were 2963 (50%) males and 3011 (50%) females, 5106 elementary school students (86%), and 868 junior high school students (15%). Findings showed that having smokers in the family affects not only children's intention and attitude toward smoking, but also the effectiveness of smoking prevention education. Especially, it was difficult to improve children's "intention not to smoke as adults", "intention to refuse cigarettes when offered", "attitude of staying away from smokeHow to cite this paper: Okuda, K., Okada, H., Tanioka, T. and Osaka, K. (2018) 76 Health rs", and "desire that their family will not smoke". Therefore, it was thought that SPEP to be less effective, in mentioned situation, in improving awareness of and attitudes toward smoking among elementary and junior high school students.

show abstract

School-based programmes for preventing smoking

Cited by 320 publications

References 537 publications

Latent tuberculous screening of recent migrants attending language classes: a cohort study and cost analysis

Latent tuberculous screening of recent migrants attending language classes: a cohort study and cost analysis

Pilot trial and process evaluation of a multilevel smoking prevention intervention in further education settings

Family Environment Factors to Impact on the Effect of the Smoking Prevention Educational Program for Elementary and Junior High School Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About