ArticleBMC public health2026
Study protocol for the Breathe Easy All Together e-cigarette prevention program: a RE-AIM framework-based experimental process and impact evaluation.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- RE-AIM Guided Evaluation of a Comprehensive Tobacco Treatment and Education Program at a Cancer Center.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundEffective preventative interventions are urgently needed to address the increasing rates of e-cigarette use among young people and to complement the Australian government's latest tobacco control measures. School-based interventions using peer leaders can effectively shape social norms and expectations associated with tobacco use. This paper describes the protocol for the Breathe Easy All Together (BEAT) study, a process and impact evaluation of the first school-based peer-leadership intervention to prevent adolescent e-cigarette use in Australia.
methodsA pre-post test design will be used to conduct process and impact evaluation of the BEAT program using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance) framework. The intervention utilises a multi-component peer-education model driven by students, to promote respiratory health and resist e-cigarette use within a supportive school environment. Volunteer Year 10 students (14- to 16-years-old) will be trained by the research team as peer leaders, to deliver two 60-min lessons to Year 7 students (11- to 13-years-old) during routine health education classes. Year 10 peer leaders and Year 7 students will complete online self-report surveys pre- and post-program to assess changes in the primary outcome of past-30-day e-cigarette use. Secondary outcomes include tobacco use behaviours, e-cigarette knowledge, perceptions, refusal skills, intentions to use e-cigarettes, and acceptability of intervention components. School staff involved in the delivery of the program will participate in semi-structured interviews to examine acceptability and factors affecting program implementation. Descriptive statistics and changes between data collection points will be assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests to investigate intervention effect on primary and secondary outcomes. Qualitative data will be analysed in alignment with RE-AIM constructs using Framework Analysis. DISCUSSION: Building upon an evidence-based peer-education model, BEAT presents a novel peer-led solution to address a gap in current research practice to prevent adolescent e-cigarette use in Australia. It has the potential to protect the future health and wellbeing of students from the harms of e-cigarette use and nicotine addiction. The RE-AIM framework is a comprehensive approach to conducting robust evaluation of multi-faceted interventions in the school environment. If effective, funding support will be sought for wider dissemination and further evaluation.
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.