ArticleBMC public health2025
Smoking and vaping in prevocational schools: qualitative insights to support the development of effective prevention strategies.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEducational disparities in smoking emerge early, with adolescent smoking strongly linked to educational level. This study aims to explore the current situation, and students' and teachers' attitudes towards smoking and vaping, prevention, and experiences and needs for effective smoking prevention programs in prevocational schools.
methodsSemi-structured focus groups with 40 (non)smoking and vaping students and individual interviews with six teachers were conducted at two Dutch prevocational schools in 2024, one with and one without prior experience in a smoking and/or vaping prevention program. Interactive tasks (e.g., mind maps, opinion statements) were used in the focus groups. Qualitative data were analysed using the Framework Approach.
resultsStudents perceived e-cigarettes as healthier than traditional cigarettes, viewed (e-)cigarette use as a personal choice and denied addiction despite regular use. E-cigarettes were widely available in and around both schools through students, while traditional cigarettes were limited to outdoor areas. The availability of e-cigarettes inside schools seemed to increase their appeal. Students purchased e-cigarettes via social media and dealers, bypassing age and flavour bans. Students preferred non-judgmental, open discussions in prevention programs, without parental involvement. Students with parents who use cigarettes found parental correction ineffective, while others made no comments on this. Teachers reported defensive reactions of students to traditional smoking education (e.g., fear appeals) and expressed a need for information on e-cigarettes and an unified prevention approach in schools.
conclusionBoth students and teachers report that cigarette use around school and e-cigarette use within the school are common. Offering information on e-cigarettes, fostering open dialogues with students, and implementing a unified school-wide approach emerged as key strategies for prevention programs.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.