Anna L Hawkes1, Kyra Hamilton, Katherine M White, Ross McD Young. 1. Viertel Centre for Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Council Queensland, 553 Gregory Terrace, Fortitude Valley, Brisbane 4006, Australia. anna.hawkes@gmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most skin cancers are preventable by encouraging consistent use of sun protective behaviour. In Australia, adolescents have high levels of knowledge and awareness of the risks of skin cancer but exhibit significantly lower sun protection behaviours than adults. There is limited research aimed at understanding why people do or do not engage in sun protective behaviour, and an associated absence of theory-based interventions to improve sun safe behaviour. This paper presents the study protocol for a school-based intervention which aims to improve the sun safe behaviour of adolescents. METHODS/ DESIGN:Approximately 400 adolescents (aged 12-17 years) will be recruited through Queensland, Australia public and private schools and randomized to the intervention (n = 200) or 'wait-list' control group (n = 200). The intervention focuses on encouraging supportive sun protective attitudes and beliefs, fostering perceptions of normative support for sun protection behaviour, and increasing perceptions of control/self-efficacy over using sun protection. It will be delivered during three × one hour sessions over a three week period from a trained facilitator during class time. Data will be collected one week pre-intervention (Time 1), and at one week (Time 2) and four weeks (Time 3) post-intervention. Primary outcomes are intentions to sun protect and sun protection behaviour. Secondary outcomes include attitudes toward performing sun protective behaviours (i.e., attitudes), perceptions of normative support to sun protect (i.e., subjective norms, group norms, and image norms), and perceived control over performing sun protective behaviours (i.e., perceived behavioural control). DISCUSSION: The study will provide valuable information about the effectiveness of the intervention in improving the sun protective behaviour of adolescents.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Most skin cancers are preventable by encouraging consistent use of sun protective behaviour. In Australia, adolescents have high levels of knowledge and awareness of the risks of skin cancer but exhibit significantly lower sun protection behaviours than adults. There is limited research aimed at understanding why people do or do not engage in sun protective behaviour, and an associated absence of theory-based interventions to improve sun safe behaviour. This paper presents the study protocol for a school-based intervention which aims to improve the sun safe behaviour of adolescents. METHODS/ DESIGN: Approximately 400 adolescents (aged 12-17 years) will be recruited through Queensland, Australia public and private schools and randomized to the intervention (n = 200) or 'wait-list' control group (n = 200). The intervention focuses on encouraging supportive sun protective attitudes and beliefs, fostering perceptions of normative support for sun protection behaviour, and increasing perceptions of control/self-efficacy over using sun protection. It will be delivered during three × one hour sessions over a three week period from a trained facilitator during class time. Data will be collected one week pre-intervention (Time 1), and at one week (Time 2) and four weeks (Time 3) post-intervention. Primary outcomes are intentions to sun protect and sun protection behaviour. Secondary outcomes include attitudes toward performing sun protective behaviours (i.e., attitudes), perceptions of normative support to sun protect (i.e., subjective norms, group norms, and image norms), and perceived control over performing sun protective behaviours (i.e., perceived behavioural control). DISCUSSION: The study will provide valuable information about the effectiveness of the intervention in improving the sun protective behaviour of adolescents.
Authors: David Moher; Sally Hopewell; Kenneth F Schulz; Victor Montori; Peter C Gøtzsche; P J Devereaux; Diana Elbourne; Matthias Egger; Douglas G Altman Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-03-25 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Heike I M Mahler; James A Kulik; Heather A Butler; Meg Gerrard; Frederick X Gibbons Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2008-04-28 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Katherine M White; Natalie G Robinson; Ross McD Young; Peter J Anderson; Melissa K Hyde; Susan Greenbank; Toni Rolfe; Julie Keane; Paul Vardon; Debra Baskerville Journal: Br J Health Psychol Date: 2007-05-18
Authors: Qingxin Mu; Guanyou Lin; Zachary R Stephen; Steve Chung; Hui Wang; Victoria K Patton; Rachel N Gebhart; Miqin Zhang Journal: Mater Today (Kidlington) Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 31.041
Authors: Magdalena Markowicz-Piasecka; Karol Sadowski; Johanna Huttunen; Joanna Sikora; Kristiina M Huttunen Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 5.923