The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.

Health promotion interventions cannot work if people do not engage with them. The aim of this study was to examine whether disengagement from an adolescent smoking prevention and cessation intervention was an independent risk factor for regular smoking 1 and 2 years later. The data were taken from a...

Ful tanımlama

Detaylı Bibliyografya
Asıl Yazarlar: Aveyard, P, Markham, W, Almond, J, Lancashire, E, Cheng, K
Materyal Türü: Journal article
Dil:English
Baskı/Yayın Bilgisi: 2003
_version_ 1826277557674180608
author Aveyard, P
Markham, W
Almond, J
Lancashire, E
Cheng, K
author_facet Aveyard, P
Markham, W
Almond, J
Lancashire, E
Cheng, K
author_sort Aveyard, P
collection OXFORD
description Health promotion interventions cannot work if people do not engage with them. The aim of this study was to examine whether disengagement from an adolescent smoking prevention and cessation intervention was an independent risk factor for regular smoking 1 and 2 years later. The data were taken from a cluster randomised controlled trial, in the West Midlands, UK, based on the transtheoretical or stages of change model. In this trial, 8,352 13-14-year old school pupils enrolled, and the data in this report were based on the 7,413 and 6,782 pupils present at 1 and 2 years follow-ups, respectively. The intervention group undertook three sessions using an interactive computer programme. At the end of the programme, pupils recorded their responses to it. Pupils were classed as engaged if they thought the intervention was both useful and interesting; all others were classed as disengaged. Random effects logistic regression related the number of times engaged to regular smoking at 1 and 2 years follow-up, adjusted for school absences and 11 potential confounders. The majority of pupils were engaged by the intervention. For participants using the intervention three times but not engaging once, the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for smoking at 1 and 2 years relative to the controls were 1.83 (1.41-2.39) and 1.70 (1.38-2.11). For those engaging three times, they were 0.79 (0.60-1.03) and 0.96 (0.75-1.21). There was no interaction with baseline intention to smoke, classified by stage of change, but there was a borderline significant interaction with baseline smoking status, with disengagement acting as a stronger risk factor among baseline never-smokers. We conclude that disengagement from interventions is a risk factor for smoking independently of experimentation with cigarettes. The best explanation is that disengagement from school, an established risk factor for smoking, generalises to disengagement from didactic school-based health promotion programmes.
first_indexed 2024-03-06T23:30:42Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:6bed6068-91e1-4cbf-8107-f1aa4f81b3ed
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-06T23:30:42Z
publishDate 2003
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:6bed6068-91e1-4cbf-8107-f1aa4f81b3ed2022-03-26T19:07:25ZThe risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:6bed6068-91e1-4cbf-8107-f1aa4f81b3edEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2003Aveyard, PMarkham, WAlmond, JLancashire, ECheng, KHealth promotion interventions cannot work if people do not engage with them. The aim of this study was to examine whether disengagement from an adolescent smoking prevention and cessation intervention was an independent risk factor for regular smoking 1 and 2 years later. The data were taken from a cluster randomised controlled trial, in the West Midlands, UK, based on the transtheoretical or stages of change model. In this trial, 8,352 13-14-year old school pupils enrolled, and the data in this report were based on the 7,413 and 6,782 pupils present at 1 and 2 years follow-ups, respectively. The intervention group undertook three sessions using an interactive computer programme. At the end of the programme, pupils recorded their responses to it. Pupils were classed as engaged if they thought the intervention was both useful and interesting; all others were classed as disengaged. Random effects logistic regression related the number of times engaged to regular smoking at 1 and 2 years follow-up, adjusted for school absences and 11 potential confounders. The majority of pupils were engaged by the intervention. For participants using the intervention three times but not engaging once, the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for smoking at 1 and 2 years relative to the controls were 1.83 (1.41-2.39) and 1.70 (1.38-2.11). For those engaging three times, they were 0.79 (0.60-1.03) and 0.96 (0.75-1.21). There was no interaction with baseline intention to smoke, classified by stage of change, but there was a borderline significant interaction with baseline smoking status, with disengagement acting as a stronger risk factor among baseline never-smokers. We conclude that disengagement from interventions is a risk factor for smoking independently of experimentation with cigarettes. The best explanation is that disengagement from school, an established risk factor for smoking, generalises to disengagement from didactic school-based health promotion programmes.
spellingShingle Aveyard, P
Markham, W
Almond, J
Lancashire, E
Cheng, K
The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.
title The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.
title_full The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.
title_fullStr The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.
title_full_unstemmed The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.
title_short The risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school-based smoking intervention.
title_sort risk of smoking in relation to engagement with a school based smoking intervention
work_keys_str_mv AT aveyardp theriskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT markhamw theriskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT almondj theriskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT lancashiree theriskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT chengk theriskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT aveyardp riskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT markhamw riskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT almondj riskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT lancashiree riskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention
AT chengk riskofsmokinginrelationtoengagementwithaschoolbasedsmokingintervention