Literature DB >> 2405239

Influence of education and advertising on the uptake of smoking by children.

B K Armstrong1, N H de Klerk, R E Shean, D A Dunn, P J Dolin.   

Abstract

How effective are peer-led programmes in preventing the uptake of smoking by children? In 1981, we conducted a randomized controlled trial of a school-based educational programme for the prevention of smoking in children who were in their seventh year at school. In this article, the reported results of two years of follow-up confirm an earlier report that both teacher-led and peer-led programmes resulted in a reduction, to about the same degree, in the uptake of smoking by girls, while only the teacher-led programme appeared to be effective in boys. In girls, both the teacher-led and peer-led programmes maintained their effects over the two years of follow-up with adjusted differences in prevalence rates of the uptake of smoking relative to the control group of -6.6% (95% CL, -17.3%, 4.0%) and -8.1% (95% CL, -18.9%, 2.7%), respectively, after two years. In boys, the effect of the teacher-led programme was reduced substantially by the second year with a difference in the prevalence rate of -2.8% (95% CL, -11.2%, 5.6%); for the peer-led programme the difference in the prevalence rate was +6.4% (95% CL, -3.6%, 16.4%). Other variables which had a significant effect on the smoking behaviour were the perceived response to cigarette advertising, parental and sibling smoking status, the perceived parental sanctions on smoking behaviour, selected peer influences and the intention to smoke. The children's perceived responses to cigarette advertising showed the strongest and most consistent evidence of an effect on the uptake of smoking by children who initially were non-smokers. After adjustment for the effects of other variables there was an excess of 15.0% (95% CL, 2.1%, 27.9%) in the prevalence rate of smoking after two years for girls who thought that they were influenced by advertising compared with those who did not. The corresponding difference for boys was 15.3% (95% CL, 4.0%, 26.6%). As smoking-prevention programmes only may delay the onset of smoking in children, it is important that legislative measures be introduced to reduce the effects of cigarette advertising.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2405239     DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1990.tb125117.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Aust        ISSN: 0025-729X            Impact factor:   7.738


  16 in total

1.  A comprehensive study of smoking in primary school children in Hong Kong: implications for prevention.

Authors:  J Peters; A J Hedley; T H Lam; C L Betson; C M Wong
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Out of the Smokescreen: does an anti-smoking advertisement affect young women's perception of smoking in movies and their intention to smoke?

Authors:  C A Edwards; W C Harris; D R Cook; K F Bedford; Y Zuo
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Tobacco marketing and adolescent smoking: more support for a causal inference.

Authors:  L Biener; M Siegel
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Randomized trials on consider this, a tailored, internet-delivered smoking prevention program for adolescents.

Authors:  David B Buller; Ron Borland; W Gill Woodall; John R Hall; Joan M Hines; Patricia Burris-Woodall; Gary R Cutter; Caroline Miller; James Balmford; Randall Starling; Bryan Ax; Laura Saba
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2006-11-17

5.  Out of the smokescreen II: will an advertisement targeting the tobacco industry affect young people's perception of smoking in movies and their intention to smoke?

Authors:  Christine Edwards; Wendy Oakes; Diane Bull
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 7.552

6.  Perception of foreign cigarettes and their advertising in China: a study of college students from 12 universities.

Authors:  S H Zhu; D Li; B Feng; T Zhu; C M Anderson
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 7.  What is learned from longitudinal studies of advertising and youth drinking and smoking? A critical assessment.

Authors:  Jon P Nelson
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Corporate externalities: a challenge to the further success of prevention science.

Authors:  Anthony Biglan
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2011-03

9.  Exposure to cigarette promotions and smoking uptake in adolescents: evidence of a dose-response relation.

Authors:  J D Sargent; M Dalton; M Beach
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 7.552

10.  A longitudinal study of smoking in year 7 and 8 students speaking English or a language other than English at home in Sydney, Australia.

Authors:  K C Tang; C Rissel; A Bauman; J Fay; S Porter; A Dawes; B Steven
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 7.552

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.