HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cameron, R Articles by Payne, M E Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cameron, R Articles by Payne, M E

Effectiveness of a social influences smoking prevention program as a function of provider type, training method, and school risk.

R Cameron, K S Brown, J A Best, C L Pelkman, C L Madill, S R Manske and M E Payne

Health Behaviour Research Group, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. cameron@healthy.uwaterloo.ca

OBJECTIVES: This study determined the effect of provider (nurse or teacher) and training method (workshop or self-preparation) on outcomes of a social influences smoking prevention program. METHODS: One hundred elementary schools were stratified by school risk score (high risk = high smoking rate among senior students) and assigned randomly to conditions: (1) teacher/self-preparation, (2) teacher/workshop, (3) nurse/self-preparation, (4) nurse/workshop, and (5) control. Intervention occurred in grades 6 to 8. Smoking status at the end of grade 8 was the primary endpoint variable. RESULTS: Intervention reduced grade 8 smoking rates in high-risk schools (smoking rates of 26.9% in control vs 16.0% in intervention schools) but not in low-risk schools. There were no significant differences in outcome as a function of training method and no significant differences in outcome between teacher-provided and nurse-provided interventions in high- and medium-risk schools. Although nurses achieved better outcomes than did teachers in low-risk schools, neither provider type achieved outcomes superior to the control condition in those schools. CONCLUSIONS: Workshop training did not affect outcomes. Teachers and nurses were equally effective providers. Results suggest that programming should target high-risk schools.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. L. Reid, S. R. Manske, and S. T. Leatherdale Factors related to adolescents' estimation of peer smoking prevalence Health Educ. Res., February 1, 2008; 23(1): 81 - 93. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Cameron, S. Manske, K. S. Brown, M. A. Jolin, D. Murnaghan, and C. Lovato Integrating Public Health Policy, Practice, Evaluation, Surveillance, and Research: The School Health Action Planning and Evaluation System Am J Public Health, April 1, 2007; 97(4): 648 - 654. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Cote, G. Godin, and C. Gagne Efficiency of an Evidence-Based Intervention to Promote and Reinforce Tobacco Abstinence Among Elementary Schoolchildren in a School Transition Period Health Educ Behav, December 1, 2006; 33(6): 747 - 759. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. A. Rohrbach, R. Grana, S. Sussman, and T. W. Valente Type II Translation: Transporting Prevention Interventions From Research to Real-World Settings. Eval Health Prof, September 1, 2006; 29(3): 302 - 333. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. W. Valente, J. B. Unger, A. Ritt-Olson, S. Y. Cen, and C Anderson Johnson The interaction of curriculum type and implementation method on 1-year smoking outcomes in a school-based prevention program Health Educ. Res., July 1, 2006; 21(3): 315 - 324. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. A. Pentz, G. K. Jasuja, L. A. Rohrbach, S. Sussman, and M. T. Bardo Translation in tobacco and drug abuse prevention research. Eval Health Prof, June 1, 2006; 29(2): 246 - 271. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. T. Leatherdale and S. Manske The Relationship Between Student Smoking in the School Environment and Smoking Onset in Elementary School Students Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2005; 14(7): 1762 - 1765. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. P. Varnell, D. M. Murray, J. B. Janega, and J. L. Blitstein Design and Analysis of Group-Randomized Trials: A Review of Recent Practices Am J Public Health, March 1, 2004; 94(3): 393 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Maughan The Impact of School Nursing on School Performance: A Research Synthesis The Journal of School Nursing, June 1, 2003; 19(3): 163 - 171. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. R. Clayton, F. D. Scutchfield, and S. W. Wyatt RESPONSE: Re: Hutchinson Smoking Prevention Project: Long-Term Randomized Trial in School-Based Tobacco Use Prevention--Results on Smoking J Natl Cancer Inst, August 15, 2001; 93(16): 1270 - 1271. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Cameron, J. A. Best, and K. S. Brown Re: Hutchinson Smoking Prevention Project: Long-Term Randomized Trial in School-Based Tobacco Use Prevention--Results on Smoking J Natl Cancer Inst, August 15, 2001; 93(16): 1267a - 1268a. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C.Y. Lovato and S. Maggi School-Based Smoking Prevention Program Is Not Effective AAP Grand Rounds, March 1, 2001; 5(3): 25 - 26. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. V. Peterson Jr., K. A. Kealey, S. L. Mann, P. M. Marek, and I. G. Sarason Hutchinson Smoking Prevention Project: Long-Term Randomized Trial in School-Based Tobacco Use Prevention--Results on Smoking J Natl Cancer Inst, December 20, 2000; 92(24): 1979 - 1991. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. I. Sashegyi, K. Stephen Brown, and P. J. Farrell Application of a Generalized Random Effects Regression Model for Cluster-correlated Longitudinal Data to a School-based Smoking Prevention Trial Am. J. Epidemiol., December 15, 2000; 152(12): 1192 - 1200. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]