Limits...
Systematic review of school-based interventions to prevent smoking for girls.

de Kleijn MJ, Farmer MM, Booth M, Motala A, Smith A, Sherman S, Assendelft WJ, Shekelle P - Syst Rev (2015)

Bottom Line: One study in which a school-based intervention was combined with a mass media intervention showed more promising results compared to only school-based prevention, and four studies with girl-specific interventions, that could not be included in the pooled analysis, reported statistically significant benefits for attitudes and intentions about smoking and quit rates.There was no evidence that school-based smoking prevention programs have a significant effect on preventing adolescent girls from smoking.Combining school-based programs with mass media interventions, and developing girl-specific interventions, deserve additional study as potentially more effective interventions compared to school-based-only intervention programs.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Gender & Women's Health, Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Postbus 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. mjjdekleijn@me.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: The purpose of this review is to study the effect of school-based interventions on smoking prevention for girls.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of articles published since 1992 on school-based tobacco-control interventions in controlled trials for smoking prevention among children. We searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Databases, CINAHL, Social Science Abstracts, and PsycInfo. Two reviewers independently assessed trials for inclusion and quality and extracted data. A pooled random-effects estimate was estimated of the overall relative risk.

Results: Thirty-seven trials were included, of which 16 trials with 24,210 girls were included in the pooled analysis. The overall pooled effect was a relative risk (RR) of 0.96 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.86-1.08; I (2)=75 %). One study in which a school-based intervention was combined with a mass media intervention showed more promising results compared to only school-based prevention, and four studies with girl-specific interventions, that could not be included in the pooled analysis, reported statistically significant benefits for attitudes and intentions about smoking and quit rates.

Conclusions: There was no evidence that school-based smoking prevention programs have a significant effect on preventing adolescent girls from smoking. Combining school-based programs with mass media interventions, and developing girl-specific interventions, deserve additional study as potentially more effective interventions compared to school-based-only intervention programs.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42012002322.

No MeSH data available.


Risk of bias
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4536766&req=5

Fig3: Risk of bias

Mentions: In Fig. 3 (Risk of bias) the risk of bias of all 37 studies is presented. Regarding risk of bias, all included studies in the pooled analysis except one [31] were judged to be at high risk of detection bias (due to the use of self-report of smoking status as the outcome), and all except three [27, 30, 31] were judged to be at low risk for bias due to group similarity at baseline and compliance. Thirty-two studies were judged to be high or unclear risk of bias due to the sequence generation and twenty-one studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data.Fig. 3


Systematic review of school-based interventions to prevent smoking for girls.

de Kleijn MJ, Farmer MM, Booth M, Motala A, Smith A, Sherman S, Assendelft WJ, Shekelle P - Syst Rev (2015)

Risk of bias
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4536766&req=5

Fig3: Risk of bias
Mentions: In Fig. 3 (Risk of bias) the risk of bias of all 37 studies is presented. Regarding risk of bias, all included studies in the pooled analysis except one [31] were judged to be at high risk of detection bias (due to the use of self-report of smoking status as the outcome), and all except three [27, 30, 31] were judged to be at low risk for bias due to group similarity at baseline and compliance. Thirty-two studies were judged to be high or unclear risk of bias due to the sequence generation and twenty-one studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data.Fig. 3

Bottom Line: One study in which a school-based intervention was combined with a mass media intervention showed more promising results compared to only school-based prevention, and four studies with girl-specific interventions, that could not be included in the pooled analysis, reported statistically significant benefits for attitudes and intentions about smoking and quit rates.There was no evidence that school-based smoking prevention programs have a significant effect on preventing adolescent girls from smoking.Combining school-based programs with mass media interventions, and developing girl-specific interventions, deserve additional study as potentially more effective interventions compared to school-based-only intervention programs.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Gender & Women's Health, Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Postbus 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. mjjdekleijn@me.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: The purpose of this review is to study the effect of school-based interventions on smoking prevention for girls.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of articles published since 1992 on school-based tobacco-control interventions in controlled trials for smoking prevention among children. We searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Databases, CINAHL, Social Science Abstracts, and PsycInfo. Two reviewers independently assessed trials for inclusion and quality and extracted data. A pooled random-effects estimate was estimated of the overall relative risk.

Results: Thirty-seven trials were included, of which 16 trials with 24,210 girls were included in the pooled analysis. The overall pooled effect was a relative risk (RR) of 0.96 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.86-1.08; I (2)=75 %). One study in which a school-based intervention was combined with a mass media intervention showed more promising results compared to only school-based prevention, and four studies with girl-specific interventions, that could not be included in the pooled analysis, reported statistically significant benefits for attitudes and intentions about smoking and quit rates.

Conclusions: There was no evidence that school-based smoking prevention programs have a significant effect on preventing adolescent girls from smoking. Combining school-based programs with mass media interventions, and developing girl-specific interventions, deserve additional study as potentially more effective interventions compared to school-based-only intervention programs.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42012002322.

No MeSH data available.