Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31652317›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion international2020

Why staff at European schools abstain from enforcing smoke-free policies on persistent violators.

Michael Schreuders, Anu Linnansaari, Pirjo Lindfors, Bas van den Putte, Anton E Kunst

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [The association between school tobacco policies and the perceived smoking prevalence of adolescents].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael SchreudersDepartment of Public Health, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anu LinnansaariFaculty of Social Sciences, Unit of Health Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Pirjo LindforsFaculty of Social Sciences, Unit of Health Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Bas van den PutteDepartment of Communication, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anton E KunstDepartment of Public Health, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tampere University · FIUniversity of Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Secondary schools in European countries increasingly implement comprehensive smoke-free school policies (SFSPs) that prohibit most or even all adolescents from smoking during school hours. Consistent enforcement of SFSPs is essential for realizing optimum effectiveness. A main challenge represents adolescents who persistently violate the rules. We studied how staff in European countries respond to these persistent violators and why they may turn a blind eye. We used interview transcripts from 69 staff members at 22 schools in 6 European countries to identify cases in which staff turned a blind eye. We then applied thematic analysis for identifying the considerations as to why they turn a blind eye. Turning a blind eye on persistent violators happened among school staff in all six countries. Three considerations were identified. First, staff believe their primary role and duty is to support all adolescents to develop into well-functioning adults, and sometimes it is best to accept smoking. Second, staff expect that applying stricter disciplinary measures will not stop persistent violators and is more likely to create more severe problems. Third, staff do not feel supported by relevant actors in society (e.g. parents) in influencing adolescent smoking. We conclude that staff's considerations stress the need to support school staff in enforcing the increasingly comprehensive rules on the most persistent smokers.

Indexed as

Smoke-Free PolicyAdolescentAdultEuropeHumansSchoolsSmokersSmoking Preventionadolescentsimplementationschoolsmoke-free

Identifiers

PMID31652317
PMCPMC7585527
OpenAlexW2982023491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.