ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2012
Smoking prevention in school students: positive effects of a hospital-based intervention.
Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Preventing and controlling water pipe smoking: a systematic review of management interventions.BMC public health · 2021Pooled it
- Tobacco cessation interventions for young people.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Interventions for waterpipe tobacco smoking prevention and cessation: a systematic review.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Theory-Informed School-Based Intervention to Prevent Waterpipe Tobacco Smoking: Changes in Knowledge, Attitude, and Behaviors in 6th and 7th Graders in Lebanon.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Trial
- Trial
- A Medical Student-Delivered Smoking Prevention Program, Education Against Tobacco, for Secondary Schools in Germany: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Trial
- Review
- Identifying the Determinants of Hookah Smoking Among the Youth; A Mixed-Methods Study.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- Smoking prevention intervention with school classes in university hospital by thoracic surgeon und pulmonologist. The Zurich prevention project.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Process Evaluation of a Medical Student-Delivered Smoking Prevention Program for Secondary Schools: Protocol for the Education Against Tobacco Cluster Randomized Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- A Medical Student-Delivered Smoking Prevention Program, Education Against Tobacco, for Secondary Schools in Brazil: Study Protocol for a Randomized Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2017Article
- Article
- Article
- Information based on knowledge-orientation alone has minimal effects in the long term.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdolescents have smoked less in recent years, but 11.7% of 12-to-17-year-olds were still smokers in 2011. The prevalence of smoking has also remained high among 18-to-25-year-olds (36.8%). An intervention program called "Students in the Hospital" was developed in which the health aspects of smoking and its individual and societal consequences were presented in an interactive informational event. In this study, we determine the efficacy of the program.
methodsFrom September 2007 to July 2008, we performed an anonymous survey by questionnaire, with a quasi-experimental control-group design, two weeks before (t(1)) and six months after (t(2)) the intervention in a group of 760 participating school students in Berlin.
results40.8% of the participants were smokers, among whom 79% stated that they smoked water pipe. Significantly fewer students in the intervention group than in the control group began smoking in the six months after the intervention (p<0.001). The chance of remaining a non-smoker was four times as high in the intervention group (OR, 4.14; CI, 1.66-10.36). Girls benefited from the intervention more than boys (OR 2.56, CI 1.06-6.19). 16.1% of smokers in the intervention group and 17.6% in the control group gave up smoking (p>0.05).
conclusionA clear primary preventive effect of the program was demonstrated, although it apparently did not induce persons who were already smokers to quit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.