Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Iranian Journal of Public Health logoLink to Iranian Journal of Public Health
. 2020 Jan;49(1):1–13.

Prevalence of Hookah Smoking among University Students in Iran: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Mahmoud KHODADOST 1, Khadije MAAJANI 2, Abbas ABBASI-GHAHRAMANLOO 3, Morteza NASERBAKHT 4, Ebrahim GHODUSI 5, Fatemeh SARVI 6, Azar MOHAMMADZADEH 7, Seyed Abbas MOTEVALIAN 1,*, Ahmad HAJEBI 8,*
PMCID: PMC7152648  PMID: 32309218

Abstract

Background:

The rise in popularity of waterpipe smoking among younger people cause increase its deleterious effects on health in recent years. The aim of this study was to estimate the pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking in university students in Iran.

Methods:

We performed the literature search from 1946 to January 21, 2019, in several international and national databases such as Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, Magiran, Iranmedex, and IranPsych. To investigate the between-study heterogeneity we used the chi-squared test and I2 index. We used a random-effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking. The potential source of heterogeneity was assessed by subgroup analysis and meta-regression.

Results:

According to the eligibility criteria, we included 37 relevant studies in our meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of lifetime water-pipe smoking was 25% (95% CI: 22–29) and in male and female subgroups was 37% (95%CI: 30–45), 17% (95%CI: 15–19) respectively. The pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking in last year was 21% (95%CI: 16–25) and in last month was 8% (95%CI: 5–11). Results of meta-regression analysis showed that there was not any significant association between suspected variables and the prevalence of water-pipe smoking.

Conclusion:

The higher prevalence rate of water pipe smoking among university students indicates the emergency need for planning preventive program.

Keywords: Prevalence, Hookah, College students, Iran, Meta-analysis

Introduction

Tobacco smoking is one of the preventable causes of morbidity and mortality in the world that contributes to over 5 million deaths every year (1). Tobacco-related deaths will rise from 6.4 million in 2015 to 8.3 million in 2030 (2). In different countries, tobacco is used in different forms.

In the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) and the Far East, one of the traditional methods of tobacco using is hookah smoking. In this form, smoke is inhaled through a water reservoir. The hookah is also known as local names such as shisha, hubble-bubble, kalian, narghile, waterpipe, gona and arghilr (3).

Hookah smoking increases the risk of a variety of adverse health outcomes such as esophageal cancer, chromosomal aberrations, decreased pulmonary and cardiovascular function, low birth weight, infertility, dental problems and infectious diseases (4, 5). Among adults, the prevalence of hookah smoking was highest in the EMR, and this index for youth was highest between EMR and Europe regions (6). Among EMR countries, hookah smoking had a decreasing trend for the most part of the 20th century. But in the starting 1990s, hookah smoking reemerged as a popular habit among youth at first in the EMR and then all over the world (7).

In different countries and studies, the prevalence of hookah smoking has been reported separately. For example, the prevalence of hookah smoking among university students reported as 21.1% in Lebanon(8), 8% in Saudi Arabia (9) (ever use among male medical students), and 54% ever and 33% current in Pakistan (10), 41% ever and 10% last month in USA (11), 38% ever and 8% regular use in UK (12).

In Iran, based on the results of two national health and disease evaluations in 1991 and 1999, the prevalence of hookah smoking had an increasing trend among 15–24 years old males and females (13). The prevalence of hookah smoking was 4.3% among 15–24 yr old participants in Iran (14). Hookah smoking is particularly popular among Iranian young adults and university students (3).

There are several factors that contribute to this popularity. First, emergence of flavored and sweetened tobacco has added to hookah’s popularity (15). Second, hookah smoking is relatively inexpensive. Third, there is a common misconception about hookah’s safety and most of students think that it is harmless (3). Fourth, there are a lot of accessible hookah bars and hookah cafes in Iranian cities and fifth, there are no legal prohibitions for hookah smoking in Iran.

Because of different prevalence rates of hookah smoking among Iranian university students we aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of hookah smoking among this stratum of population by meta-analysis.

Methods

Study protocol

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified studies that reported the prevalence of hookah smoking among university students in Iran. The preferred item for reporting of systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines was used to design, conduct and report the result of study.

Search strategy

We performed the literature search from 1946 to January 21, 2019 on several international online databases (Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO), and national (Magiran, Scientific Information Database, Iranmedex, Medlib, Irandoc, and IranPsych) databases. We used the PICO of systematic review and meta-analysis for retrieved and screen the related studies. Multiple combinations of keywords and phrases were used to specify the geographic location (i.e., country and province names), the population of interest (e.g., university students), medical domains (e.g., substance-related disorders), and type of substance (e.g., “Hubble-bubble” OR “Hookah” OR “wastepipe”). The following medical subject headings (MeSH) and non-MeSH keywords were used in our search strategy: “Hubble-bubble” OR “Hookah” OR “waterpipe” AND “Student” OR “university student” AND “Iran” AND “Prevalence” AND “Substance-Related Disorders” OR “Drug Abuse” OR “Drug Dependence” OR “Drug Addiction” OR “Substance Use Disorders”. We did not apply limitations on time of publication and language. We assess the reference section of relevant review studies or national program reports to identify studies and unpublished studies were excluded in the search strategy. EndNote X7 citation manager software (version X7, for Windows, Thomson Reuters, and Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used to manage and screen citations from several online databases.

Eligibility criteria

We used the following criteria to select the eligible publications:

Inclusion criteria: 1) We included all observational studies reporting data on the prevalence of hookah smoking among University Students, including cross-sectional studies, cohort studies and case-control studies. 2) For the disease area, we included studies that report data on hookah smoking through self-rated questionnaires or interviews through interviews among university students. 3) We limited our geographic scope to studies conducted within Iran. 4) For the study population, we included studies conducted among university students at the time of the study.

Exclusion criteria: 1) We excluded reviews, meta-analyses, case series, case reports, short communication, comments, letters, ecologic and qualitative studies but retained them for hand searching of references. 2) Studies with a sample size less than 100 were considered underpowered and prone to a wider range of biases and thus were excluded. 3) Any studies that reported the prevalence of substance use among Iranian students residing aboard. 4) We excluded studies in the general population’s high school students and other age and gender-specific groups that not include university students.

Data extraction

Two of the co-authors (AM & KM) independently extracted data from included studies using structured sheets in Microsoft Excel® and discussed disagreements with the third coauthor (MK) as indicated. We extracted data on 1) authors, 2) publication year, 3) publication type, 4) site/s of study, 5) study implementation year, 6) type of study, 7) sampling method, 8) study population (eligibility criteria) and sample size, 9) data gathering method (anonymous self-rated questionnaire, anonymous self-rated computer-based questionnaire, anonymous interview, data extraction from university students health files), 10) language of the publication (Farsi, English), 11) study scale (city, province, sub-national, national), 12) number of recruitment sites, 13) gender distribution, 14) age characteristics, 15) other key socioeconomic indicators, and 16) prevalence of water-pipe use.

Quality assessment

After including the relevant studies according to inclusion criteria, we used strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) checklist (16) to investigate the quality of each eligible study. The studies were classified into three groups based on this checklist. If the studies get more than 80 percent of total score to consider as high quality, 60–79% of total score as intermediate quality and 30–59% of total score they classified as low quality. Two authors (KH, M, and M.KH) were independently investigating the quality of each included study. The agreements between reviewers were assessed by weighted Kappa (78%).

Statistical analysis

We used the Q test and I2 index to investigate the statistical heterogeneity. Based on results of heterogeneity tests, we used random effect model weighted by the inverse of variance to calculate pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for prevalence of hookah smoking use. The standard error in each study was calculated using the binomial distribution. The metaprop package in Stata was used to calculate CIs for the original data using the exact binomial and score test. Meta-regression analysis was used to investigate the source of heterogeneity. The sensitivity analysis was performed using metainf command in stata software. Publication bias was not assessed, because the prevalence rate as a proportion always is a positive number and if we saw asymmetry in funnel plot it is not due to the publication bias. We used Stata11 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) to perform all statistical analysis.

Result

Study characteristics

The result of the initial search yielded 1917 studies and after screening the included studies by title, abstract and full text according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 37 studies were finalized (Fig. 1). The characteristics of included studies are reported in Table 1.

Fig. 1:

Fig. 1:

Open in a new tab

Flow diagram showing the different phases involved in searching for relevant publications in prevalence of Water-pipe smoking in college student in Iran

Table 1:

The characteristic of studies were included in the meta-analysis of water-pipe smoking among university students in Iran

Manuscript Reference number Year of study Study location Age in years (Mean) Sampling methods Sample size (n) Response rate (%) Prevalence (%)
Last month Last year Lifetime
1 (44) 2013 Tehran 21.1 (3.1) Stratified random sampling 1992 - 8.9 17.8 26.6
2 (45) 2011 Iran 22 Random Cluster Sampling 8352 - - - 28.42
3 (46) 2011 Tabriz 22.1 Random Cluster Sampling 1838 - - - 8.5
4 (47) 2013 Tehran 23 Random sampling 604 - - - 29.3
5 (48) 2009 Yazd 22 (3.4) Random sampling 534 - - - 15.9
6 (49) 2010 Zanjan 21.3 (2.3) Stratified random sampling 1200 - 13 - 18.5
7 (50) 2013 Jahrom 21.2 (2.6) Random sampling 1149 - 5.1 - 24.02
8 (51) 2015 Fasa 23.1 (2.5) Stratified random sampling 157 - - - 32.3
9 (52) 2017 Tehran 21.3 (2.7) Census 1012 - - - 34.1
10 (53) 2016 Larestan 22.3 (2.4) Random sampling 390 100% - - 22.6
11 (54) 2017 Asadabad 22.7 (3.3) Stratified random sampling 400 100% - - 32
12 (55) 2010 Bandar Abbas 23 Stratified random sampling 310 100% - - 24.8
13 (56) 2011 Tabriz 22.1 (2.2) Random sampling 1837 100% 8.5 - 8.5
14 (17) 2013 Iran 22.5 Stratified random sampling 1053 100% - - 41.3
15 (57) 2014 Tehran 22.4 Random sampling 422 100% - - 14.9
16 (58) 2009 Tehran 20.2 (1.8) Census 1568 100% 8.9 - 30.8
17 (21) 2016 kurdistan _ Stratified random sampling 288 100% - - 11
18 (59) 2012 Zahedan _ Random Cluster Sampling 1014 98.9% - - 40.4
19 (60) 2011 Tehran 22.9 Random Cluster Sampling 977 100% - - 27.7
20 (61) 2007 Isfahan & Kashan _ Random sampling 812 100% - - 19.2
21 (18) 2008 Shiraz _ Random sampling 971 100% 3.6 - 6.3
22 (62) 2006 Iran 22 Random Cluster Sampling 8373 99.9% 13 21 30
23 (63) 2011 Tehran _ Random Cluster Sampling 3582 98.6% - - 25.7
24 (64) 2006 Tehran _ Random sampling 2997 99.7% 13.2 22.1 33.9
25 (20) 2015 Lorestan 19.6 (2.2) Random sampling 1131 95.8% 0.9 - 14
26 (65) 2008 Broujerd 23 Census 100 100% - - 36
27 (66) 2011 Iran _ Stratified random sampling 7330 95.11% 11.6 17.9 28.7
28 (67) 2010 Kerman _ Stratified random sampling 180 100% - 38.3
29 (68) 2018 Iran 20.6 (2.4) Random Cluster Sampling 4940 100% - 17
30 (69) 2017 Qazvin 19.6 (2.4) Census 524 97.9% - 35.5
31 (70) 2018 Hormozgan 23 (4.2) Multi stage random sampling 524 100% 14.5 _
32 (41) 2015 Tabriz _ Stratified random sampling 1730 100% 11.6
33 (42) 2016 Kerman 20.5 (1.5) Multistage non-random sampling 1730 83.6% 44.6
34 (38) 2016 Bushehr 22.1 (2.3) Random sampling 977 100% 16.1
35 (71) 2014 Karaj 22.4 (4.5) Random Cluster Sampling 1959 94% 3.4
Open in a new tab
a.

Survey includes 5 universities from Iran: Tehran University, Isfahan University of Technology, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Razi University of Kermansheh, and Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

b.

Tehran, Guilan, Mazandaran, Golestan, Khorasan shomali, Khorasan razavi, Khorasan Jonobi, Sistan and Balouchestan, Kerman, Hormozgan, Boshehr, Khozestan, Fars, Esfahan, Markazi, Qome, Semnan, Yazad. Qazvin, Lorestan, Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, Kohgiluyeh Boyer, Kurdistan, Kermansheh, Ilam, Hamedan, Western Azerbaijan, East Azarbaijan, Ardabil, Zanjan university.

c.

survey includes 5 universities from whole of Iran: Tehran university, Isfahan University of Technology, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Razi University of Kermansheh, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

The total sample size in 37 studies that reported the prevalence of water-pipe smoking was 64738 university students. Among the 37 studies, 18 were on the male students (N= 27565) and 16 studies on female student (N=35507), respectively (Table1).

The highest prevalence of water-pipe smoking (at least once in a lifetime) in total male and female students was equal to 41.3% (17), and the lowest prevalence was 6.3% (18) in Shiraz. The highest and the lowest prevalence of water-pipe smoking in male students were 67.2% and 15% respectively (19, 20). In addition, the highest prevalence of water-pipe smoking in female students was reported 42.8% (3) and the lowest prevalence was 7.5% (21).

Heterogeneity

The result of chi-squared test and I2 index indicated that there was a significant between-study heterogeneity in the prevalence of at least once in lifetime water-pipe smoking (P<0.001, I2 =98.95%), at least once in the last year (P<0.001, I2=98.84%) and in at least once in the last month (P<0.001, I2 =99.07%), so we used random effect model in this study.

Subgroup analysis

According to the random effect model, the pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking at least once in a lifetime was 25% (95% CI: 22–29) in university student, and the pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking at least once in a lifetime in male and female was 37% (95%CI: 30–45), 17% (95%CI: 15–19) respectively (Table 2). The pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking at least once in the last year in mixed gender in college student was 21% (95%CI: 16–25) and in male and female student was 31% (95%CI: 20–42) and 14% (95%CI: 8–20), respectively (Table 2). In addition, the pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking at least once in the last month in both male and female student was 8% (95%CI: 5–11), and in male and female subgroup was 11% (95%CI: 5–16) and 4% (95%CI: 2–6) respectively (Table 2).

Table 2:

The pooled prevalence of water-pipe smoking in college students of Iran

Subgroup No. of Included studies Pooled Prevalence (Random Effect) 95% CI I2 P value for I2
At least once in the Life time 33 25 22–29 98.95 P<0.001
Male 12 17 15–19 85.19 P<0.001
Female 14 37 30–45 99.05 P<0.001
At least once in the Last year 8 21 16–25 98.84 P<0.001
Male 5 31 20–42 98.60 P<0.001
Female 5 14 8–20 98.19 P<0.001
At least once in the Last month 12 8 5–11 99.70 P<0.001
Male 7 11 5–16 98.54 P<0.001
Female 7 4 2–6 96.90 P<0.001
At least once in the Lifetime by sampling method Census 2 31 29–33 15.25 P=0.91
Random Cluster Sampling 5 23 17–30 99.2 P<0.001
Random Sampling 12 20 14–27 98.8 P<0.001
Stratified random sampling 8 27 22–33 96.6 P<0.001
Open in a new tab

Although the pooled prevalence of lifetime water-pipe smoking by sampling method was 31% (95%CI: 29–33) in census sampling method, and in random cluster sampling, random sampling and stratified random sampling method was 23% (95%CI: 17–30), 20% (95%CI: 14–27) and 27% (95%CI: 22–33) respectively (Table 2).

Sensitivity Analysis

The lower pooled prevalence of water pipe-smoking after omitting the study conducted in Azad Medical University (17) was 24.8% (95%CI: 20.1–28.7), and the higher pooled prevalence estimation in sensitivity analysis was 26.1 (95% CI: 22.4–29.8) after omitted the study in medical students of southern Iran (18). More details of sensitivity analysis in every subgroup are described in Table 3.

Table 3:

Results of Sensitivity Analysis to Assess the Effects of Every Study on Pooled Prevalence of water-pipe smoking

Subgroup Pre-Sensitivity Analysis Post-Sensitivity Analysis
No. of Included studies Upper and Lower of EFa 95% CI Pooled Prevalence (Random Effect) Excluded Studies 95% CI Pooled Prevalence (Random Effect)
At least once in the Life time 33 Upper 22–29 25 18 22.47–29.85 26.16
Lower 17 20.19–28.71 24.81
At least once in the Last year 8 Upper 16–25 21 41 18.46–27.69 23.07
Lower 42 14.94–20.62 17.78
At least once in the Last month 12 Upper 5–11 8 20 6.12–10.99 8.55
Lower 43 4.49–10.38 7.43
Open in a new tab
a.

EF: effect size; the upper and lower limit of effect size (pooled odds ratio) in post-sensitivity analysis after omitting each study

Meta-Regression Analysis

To assess the effect of suspected variables such as year of study, sample size and sampling method in heterogeneity we used meta-regression analysis. Results of meta-regression analysis in Table 4 did not show any significant association between this variable the prevalence of water-pipe smoking.

Table 4:

Meta-regression analysis for assessing the effect of suspected variables on the pooled Prevalence of Water-pipe smoking

Univariable Model Multivariable Model
Prevalence rate Variable β SE P-value* β SE P-value
At least once in the Life time Sample sizea 0.27 4.01 0.94 −0.34 4.14 0.93
Year of study 0.80 4.44 0.85 3.29 5.04 0.52
Sampling methodb −8.10 8.01 0.32 −10.65 9.13 0.25
At least Last year once in the Sample size 6.34 12.31 0.62 6.8 14.23 0.65
Year of study −0.006 9.76 1 1.36 14.23 0.65
Sampling method - - - - - -
At least once in the Last month Sample size 4.70 4.43 0.31 9.49 4.73 0.08
Year of study −2.65 2.60 0.33 −6.08 3.05 0.08
Sampling method −1.07 4.68 0.82 4.19 4.75 .040
Open in a new tab
a

Studies with sample size ≥1,000 versus <1,000 as reference.

b

Random sampling, multistage random sampling, stratified random sampling, random cluster sampling vs. census as reference.

*

P-value<0.05 considered significant

Discussion

We systematically reviewed the prevalence of hookah smoking among university students in Iran. We found that among 39 studies that reported the prevalence of hookah smoking, the prevalence of lifetime hookah smoking in total, males and females was 24%, 37%, and 17% respectively. Also in the last year, the prevalence of lifetime hookah smoking in total, males, and females was 21%, 31%, and 14% respectively. The results indicated that the prevalence of hookah smoking in the last month was 8%, 11%, and 4 % for total, male, and female students.

To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first try to reporting the pooled prevalence of hookah smoking among Iranian university students. There are a lot of studies that reported prevalence of hookah smoking in other countries especially western ones. In North Carolina lifetime and last month prevalence of hookah smoking among university students has been reported as 40% and 17% respectively (22). Also in the United States, 40.5%, 30.6% and 9.5% of students smoked hookah in the lifetime, last year, and last month (11). In a British university, 38% and 8% of students reported hookah smoking in the lifetime and regularly use (12). The last report of Monitoring the Future (MTF) study indicated that the last year prevalence of hookah smoking decreased from 27.9% in 2011 to 23.4% in 2015 (23). Another study in the United States showed that the prevalence of hookah smoking among university students was 7.8% in the past month (24). The results of the National Collage Health Assessment (NCHA) indicate that among United States university students, the lifetime prevalence of hookah smoking increased from 24.8% to 30.8%, from 2008 to 2010 and last year prevalence ranged from 7% to 10.2% in this time interval (25). The comparison of our findings as a meta-analysis and the prevalence of hookah smoking in western countries indicated that the prevalence of hookah smoking among Iranian university students is slightly lower than in western countries.

In developing countries, the pattern of hookah smoking among university students seems differently from developed ones. For example in South Africa, lifetime and last month prevalence of hookah smoking among university students was 63% and 9.9% respectively in 2013 (26).

The prevalence of hookah smoking in Middle Eastern countries (other than Iran) including Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria ranged from 9% to 15% among the general population (27–29). However, for university students, the rates are different. The result of a review showed that among Eastern Mediterranean Region the lifetime prevalence of hookah smoking among university students was highest in Lebanon 65.3%) (6).

In general, it seems that the prevalence of hook-ah smoking in our study is lower than in other neighboring countries. For example, the lifetime and last month prevalence of hookah smoking have been reported as 61.1% and 42.7% respectively for university students of Jordan (30). In addition, the last month’s prevalence of hookah smoking has been reported as 32.3% among Lebanon university students (31). The total prevalence of hookah smoking was 32.7% among the university of Turkey students (32). The higher rate of hookah smoking in neighboring Arab countries of Iran is due to the cultural differences in these countries that use of hookah was popular in males and females from the ancient period. In addition, there is a misunderstanding in these countries that hookah smoking is healthy, safer, and non-addictive comparing cigarette smoking. The results of a meta-analysis indicated that in comparison to other population, the prevalence of hookah smoking was alarmingly high among university students (33). In Iran, the results of a pooled analysis of National STEPS Surveys indicated that the prevalence of hookah smoking ranged from 1.7% to 10.9% in men and 0 to 16.8% in women (34). This national study also showed that South and Southeastern areas of Iran with similarity in cultural context with neighborhood Arab countries had a high prevalence of daily hookah smoking. As a result, it seems that in consistent with other studies (33), the prevalence rate of hookah smoking among Iranian university students is higher than general population.

There are lots of studies that mentioned the deleterious health outcomes of hookah smoking (35). In addition to these outcomes, hookah smoking is likely to be associated with the risk of dependency (36). Hookah smoking can serve as gateway to engage in cigarette smoking or as a replacement for it among quitters (37). On the other hand, some statistical approaches like latent class analysis showed that hookah smoking was occurring commonly with cigarette smoking among some specific groups of university students (38, 39). From preventive view, it is better to consider integrated programs to reducing tobacco smoking among Iranian university students.

The results of a review showed that socializing, relaxation, pleasure, and entertainment are the most important motives for hookah smoking among the general population. On the other hand, additional motives were reported by university students and include peer pressure, fashion, and curiosity (35). Health policymakers should scale up efforts to combat the hookah smoking phenomenon in Iran. The luck of media campaigns about hookah smoking implied that they must be safer (40). Also, there is a need to develop a valid and reliable questionnaire for assessing Iranian university student’s motives, beliefs and attitudes toward hookah smoking. Such a tool may be very useful to identify factors that could modify the effect of future interventions designed for hookah smoking cessation.

Our study is unique in full consideration of all types of frequency and duration of waterpipe use in a college student in Iran e.g. lifetime use, last year use, last month and daily use. Moreover, we tried to consider the gray literature to cover all studies conducted in Iran. However, this study has several limitations regarding the high level of heterogeneity existed in the subgroups pooled prevalence and should be considered when interpreted. Some variations in studies could be the source of heterogeneity e.g. sampling strategy and representativeness of samples, the sample size of studies, the validity of questionnaires used in studies. We tried to include all gray literature in the meta-analysis; however, full consideration of gray literature is another limitation in this study due to the lack of universal databases in Iran to access all research projects and dissertations.

Conclusion

The prevalence of hookah smoking in our study is lower than in other neighboring countries. Gender and methods of sampling are associated with variation in the pooled prevalence of hook-ah smoking in our study. The prevalence rate of hookah smoking among Iranian university students is higher than the general population. Regarding lower stigmatization of hookah than cigarette smoking in Iranian culture and increasing the prevalence of hookah in college students than general population, some national preventing programs such as peer group educations program in universities, mass media campaigns and comprehensive nationwide tobacco control programs is needed.

Ethical considerations

Ethical issues (Including plagiarism, informed consent, misconduct, data fabrication and/or falsification, double publication and/or submission, redundancy, etc.) have been completely observed by the authors.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Mental and Social Health and Addiction office in Ministry of Health and medical education of Iran.

Footnotes

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.

References

  • 1.Samet JM. (2013). Tobacco smoking: the leading cause of preventable disease worldwide. Thorac Surg Clin 23:103–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Mathers CD, Loncar D. (2006). Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Med 3:e442. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, Rahimi-Movaghar A, Zeraati H, et al. (2016). Prevalence of Hookah Smoking and Its Related Factors Among Students of Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 2012 – 2013. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci 10:e4551. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Nasrollahzadeh D, Kamangar F, Aghcheli K, et al. (2008). Opium, tobacco, and alcohol use in relation to oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma in a high-risk area of Iran. Br J Cancer 98:1857–63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Dar-Odeh NS, Abu-Hammad OA. (2009). Narghile smoking and its adverse health consequences: a literature review. Br Dent J 206:571–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jawad M, Charide R, Waziry R, et al. (2018). The prevalence and trends of waterpipe tobacco smoking: A systematic review. PLoS One,13:e0192191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Maziak W, Ward KD, Afifi Soweid RA, Eissenberg T. (2004). Tobacco smoking using a waterpipe: a re-emerging strain in a global epidemic. Tob Control 13:327–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Tamim H, Terro A, Kassem H, et al. (2003). Tobacco use by university students, Lebanon, 2001. Addiction 98:933–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Al-Turki YA. (2006). Smoking habits among medical students in Central Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J 27:700–3. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jawaid A, Zafar AM, Rehman TU, et al. (2008). Knowledge, attitudes and practice of university students regarding waterpipe smoking in Pakistan. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 12:1077–84. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Primack BA, Sidani J, Agarwal AA, et al. (2008). Prevalence of and associations with waterpipe tobacco smoking among US university students. Ann Behav Med 36:81–86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Jackson D, Aveyard P. (2008). Waterpipe smoking in students: prevalence ,risk factors, symptoms of addiction, and smoke intake. Evidence from one British university. BMC Public Health 8:174. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Mohammad K, Nourbala A, Madjdzadeh R, Karimlou M. (2001). Trend of smoking prevalence in Iran from 1991 to 1999 based on two national health survey. Hakim Res J 3:290–94. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ghelichkhani P, Yaseri M, Yousefifard M, et al. (2018). The Gap of Cigarette and Hookah Smoking Between Socioeconomic Groups in Iran: Effect of Inequalities on Socioeconomic Position. Arch Iran Med 21:418–424. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Martinasek MP, McDermott RJ, Martini L. (2011). Waterpipe (hookah) tobacco smoking among youth. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 41:34–57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Khodadost M, Maajani K, Arabsalmani M, et al. (2017). Is tattooing a risk factor for hepatitis c transmission?: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepat Mon 17: e14308. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Monirpoor N, Khoosfi H, Gholamy Zarch M, et al. (2014). Vulnerability to substance abuse and the risk of suicide in students of region 12 of islamic azad university. Int J High Risk Behav Addict 3:e11229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Sahraian A, Sharifian M, Omidvar B, Javadpour A. (2010). Prevalence of substance abuse among the medical students in Southern Iran. Shiraz E-Medical Journal 11:198–202. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Sharifirad G, Charkazi A, Berdi-Ghourchaei A, et al. (2012). Smoking behavior based on stages of change model among Iranian male students in 2009–2010 academic year. Zahedan J Res Med Sci 14:13–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Tarrahi MJ, Mohammadpoorasl A, Ansari H, Mohammadi Y. (2017). Substance Abuse and Its Predictors in Freshmen Students of Lorestan Universities: Subgrouping of College Students in West of Iran. Health Scope,6:e64186. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Rahimzadeh M, Rastegar H, Fazel Kalkhoran J. (2017). Prevalence and Causes of Tendency to Cigarette and Water Pipe Smoking among Male and Female Physical Education Students in University of Kurdistan. J Health 7:680–686. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Sutfin EL, McCoy TP, Reboussin BA, et al. (2011). Prevalence and correlates of waterpipe tobacco smoking by college students in North Carolina. Drug Alcohol Depend 115:131–136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Johnston LD, Miech RA, O'Malley PM, et al. (2018) Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2017: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. (ed)^(eds), Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, Michigan: pp. 1–123. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Haider MR, Salloum RG, Islam F, et al. (2015). Factors associated with smoking frequency among current waterpipe smokers in the United States: findings from the National College Health Assessment II. Drug Alcohol Depend 153:359–363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Jarrett T, Blosnich J, Tworek C, Horn K. (2012). Hookah use among US college students: results from the National College Health Assessment II. Nicotine Tob Res 14:1145–1153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kruger L, van Walbeek C, Vellios N. (2016). Waterpipe and cigarette smoking among university students in the Western Cape, South Africa. Am J Health Behav 40:416–426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Maziak W, Ward K, Mzayek F, et al. (2005). Mapping the health and environmental situation in informal zones in Aleppo, Syria: report from the Aleppo household survey. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 78:547–558. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Maziak W, Nakkash R, Bahelah R, et al. (2014). Tobacco in the Arab world: old and new epidemics amidst policy paralysis. Health Policy Plan 29:784–794. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Baddoura R, Wehbeh-Chidiac C. (2001). Prevalence of tobacco use among the adult Lebanese population. East Mediterr Health J 7:819–28. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Azab M, Khabour OF, Alkaraki AK, et al. (2010). Water pipe tobacco smoking among university students in Jordan. Nicotine Tob Res 12:606–612. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Saade G, Warren C, Jones N, Mokdad A. (2009). Tobacco use and cessation counseling among health professional students: Lebanon Global Health Professions Student Survey. J Med Liban 57:243–247. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Poyrazoğlu S, Şarli Ş, Gencer Z, Günay O. (2010). Waterpipe (narghile) smoking among medical and non-medical university students in Turkey. Ups J Med Sci 115:210–216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Akl EA, Gunukula SK, Aleem S, et al. (2011). The prevalence of waterpipe tobacco smoking among the general and specific populations: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 11:244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Nemati S, Rafei A, Freedman ND, et al. (2017). Cigarette and water-pipe use in Iran: Geographical distribution and time trends among the adult population; A pooled analysis of national STEPS surveys, 2006– 2009. Arch Iran Med 20:295–301. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Akl EA, Jawad M, Lam WY, et al. (2013). Motives, beliefs and attitudes towards waterpipe tobacco smoking: a systematic review. Harm Reduct J 10:12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Maziak W, Rastam S, Ibrahim I, et al. (2009). CO exposure, puff topography, and subjective effects in waterpipe tobacco smokers. Nicotine Tob Res 11:806–811. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Maziak W. (2008). The waterpipe: time for action. Addiction 103:1763–1767. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Afrashteh S, Ghaem H, Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, et al. (2017). Clustering and combining pattern of high-risk behaviors among Iranian university students: A latent class analysis. J Res Health Sci 17:e00398. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Mohammadpoorasl A, Ghahramanloo AA, Allahverdipour H. (2013). Risk-taking behaviors and subgrouping of college students: a latent class analysis. Am J Mens Health 7:475–481. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Roskin J, Aveyard P. (2009). Canadian and English students' beliefs about waterpipe smoking: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health 9:10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Safiri S, Rahimi-Movaghar A, Yunesian M, et al. (2016). Subgrouping of risky behaviors among Iranian college students: a latent class analysis. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, 12:1809–16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Zahedi R, Noroozi A, Hajebi A, et al. (2018). Self-Reported and Network Scale-Up Estimates of Substance Use Prevalence among University Students in Kerman, Iran. J Res Health Sci 18:e00413. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Taremian F, Bolhari J, Pairavi H, Ghazi Tabatabaeii M. (2008). The Prevalence of Drug Abuse among University Students in Tehran. Iran J Psychiatry Clin Psychol, 13(4):335–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, Fotouhi A, Zeraati H, Rahimi-Movaghar A. (2015). Prescription drugs, alcohol, and illicit substance use and their correlations among medical sciences students in iran. Int J High Risk Behav Addict, 4(1):e21945. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Akbari Zardkhaneh S, Sohrabi F, Taraghijah S, et al. (2011). Demographic characteristics and substance use among students at state universities. Journal of Educational Psychology Studies, 7:1–22[Pesian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Allahverdipour H, Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, Mohammadpoorasl A, Nowzari P. (2015). Cigarette Smoking and its Relationship with Perceived Familial Support and Religiosity of University Students in Tabriz. Iran J Psychiatry, 10:136–43. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Babaei Heydarabadi A, Ramezankhani A, Barekati H, et al. (2015). Prevalence of Substance Abuse Among Dormitory Students of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Int J High Risk Behav Addict 4:e22350. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Dehghani K, Zare A, Dehghani H, Sedghi H, Poormovahed Z. (2010). Drug Abuse Prevalence and Risk Factors in Students of Shaheed Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Journal of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, 18:164–169[Persian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Goreishi A, Shajari Z. (2013). Substance Abuse among Students of Zanjan’s Universities (Iran): A Knot of Today's Society. Addict Health, 5:66–72. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Heydari ST, Izedi S, Sarikhani Y, et al. (2015). The Prevalence of Substance use and Associated Risk Factors Among University Students in the City of Jahrom, Southern Iran. Int J High Risk Behav Addict, 4:e22381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Jeihooni AK, Khiyali Z, Kashfi SM, et al. (2018). Knowledge and attitudes of university students towards hookah smoking in Fasa, Iran. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci, 12: e11676. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Latifi A, Mohammadi S, Barkhordari A, et al. (2017). Self-efficacy of young adults across stages of waterpipe cessation-a model-based cross-sectional study. J Evolution Med Dent Sci, 6:6545–6550. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Maghsoudi A, Jalali M, Neydavoodi M, et al. (2017). Estimating the prevalence of high-risk behaviors using network scale-up method in university students of Larestan in 2014. J Subst Use, 22:145–148. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Makvandi Z, Sharifi M, Barati M. (2017). Assessment of Factors Associated With Hookah Consumption Among College Students of Asad Abad City Base on The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) in 2015–2016. Iran J Health Educ Health Promot, 5:270–279. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Mardani H, Sheikhi A, Kavosian J. (2012). The Prevalence of Substance Use among Bandar Abas Azad Islamic University Students. Research on Addiction,6(23):65–82 [Persian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.MohammadPoorasl A, Abbasi Ghahramanloo A, Allahverdipour H, Modaresi Esfeh J. (2014). Prevalence of hookah smoking in relation to religiosity and familial support in college students of Tabriz, northwest of Iran. J Res Health Sci 14(4):268–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Mozafarinia R, Assarian M, Ziaaddini A. (2017). Prevalence of Substance Abuse among Students of Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Addict Health, 9(2):103–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Amin-Esmaeili M, Yunesian M, Sahimi-Izadian E, et al. (2017). The Prevalence of illicit substance use among students of medical sciences in Tehran: results from four repeated surveys from 2006 to 2009. J Child Adolesc Subst Abuse, 26(2):152–161. [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Refahi SAA, Hosseinbor M, Poudineh Z, Sharif Hosseinbor M, Masumian S. (2016). Prevalence of Consumption of Addictive Substances Among Students of Islamic Azad University (Zahedan Branch). Int J High Risk Behav Addict, 6:e19645. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Rezakhani Moghadam H, Shojaeizadeh D, Lashgarara B, et al. (2013). Comparison of Substance Abuse and its Causes among Students of Tehran University of Medical Sciences and University of Tehran. J Health Syst Res, 8(7): 1300–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Roohafza H, Sadeghi M, Shahnam M, et al. (2011). Perceived factors related to cigarette and waterpipe (ghelyan) initiation and maintenance in university students of Iran. Int J Public Health, 56(2):175–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Sohrabi F, Akbari Zardkhaneh S, Taragijah S, et al. (2009). Substance Abuse Among State University students, Iran, 1385–1386. Social Welfare, 2009;9(34):65–82 [Persian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Taremian F, Bolhari J, Peyravi H, Asgari A. (2014). Drug use prevalence among students of universities of medical sciences in Tehran. Research on Addiction,7(28):9–21 [Persian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Taremian F, Bolhari J, Pairavi H, Ghazi Tabatabaeii M. (2008). The Prevalence of Drug Abuse among University Students in Tehran. Iran J Psychiatry,13(4):335–342 [Persian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Valipour M, Zivdar M, Mir A, Bazvand S, Mandana S, Omidi Fard Z. (2009). Prevalence of substance abuse and its underlying causes among students. Aflak Quarterly Journal, 8(14–15):63–67 [Persian]. [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Yaghubi H, Taremian F, Peyravi H, Zafar M. (2015). Drug use Prevalence among College Students of Ministry of Sceince, Research and Technology, Iran (2012). Research on Addiction, 8(32):9–36. [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Zivari-Rahman M, Lesani M, Shokouhi-Moqaddam S. (2012). Comparison of Mental Health, Aggression and Hopefulness between Student Drug-Users and Healthy Students (A Study in Iran). Addict Health, 4(1–2):36–42. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Kabir K, Bahari A, Hajizadeh M, et al. (2018). Substance abuse behaviors among university freshmen in Iran: a latent class analysis. Epidemiol Health, 40:e2018030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Sahebihagh MH, Hajizadeh M, Ansari H, et al. (2017). Modeling the underlying tobacco smoking predictors among 1st year university students in Iran. Int J Prev Med, 8: 90. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, Khodadost M, Moradpour F, et al. (2018). Prevalence of nonmedical use of prescription-type opioids, methylphenidate, and sedative-hypnotics among university students in the south of Iran: a regression analysis. Electron Physician, 10(6):6981–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Kabir K, Mohammadpoorasl A, Esmaeelpour R, et al. (2016). Tobacco Use and Substance Abuse in Students of Karaj Universities. Int J Prev Med, 7:105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Iranian Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of Tehran University of Medical Sciences

RESOURCES