Skip to main content
. 2011 Oct 5;2011(10):CD003439. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003439.pub2

Sargent 2000.

Methods Cohort study 
 Baseline survey: Sept 1996 
 Follow‐up: 12 and 18 months (1997 and 1998) 
 Site: Vermont, USA 
 Research question: Primary study evaluated a social influences tobacco prevention programme. This paper examines the association between receptivity to cigarette promotions and smoking uptake. 
 Analysis: multivariate proportional odds, controlling for baseline smoking index, peer and family smoking, school grade, gender, intervention status, school performance and parental education
Participants 727 students (grade 4‐11) from 3 schools 
 537 (74%) completed both follow‐up surveys. 65.4% were never‐smokers at baseline 
 480 never or experimental smokers at baseline used in analysis. 
 Survey method: Survey read aloud to students in grades 4‐5, self‐administered for students in grades 6‐11.
Interventions Receptivity to cigarette promotions assessed as Yes/No 
 Yes if they owned or would be willing to use a cigarette promotional item. 
 Test‐retest reliability of questions tested in separate sample. K was > = 0.70 for all questions, for smoking index it was 0.96
Outcomes Smoking index with 6 categories: 
 Never‐smoker/ non‐susceptible (Never puffed on a cigarette and 'Definitely not' response to 'Do you think you will smoke a cigarette in next 6 months?' and 'Would you smoke a cigarette if best friend offered you one?' 
 Never‐smoker/ susceptible (Never puffed on a cigarette and answered affirmatively to smoke if best friend offered, and smoking a cigarette during the next t6 months) 
 Puffer (not more than 1 cigarette) 
 Experimenter/Not current (2‐100 in lifetime but none in past 30 days) 
 Experimenter/Current (2‐100 in lifetime and smoked in past 30 days) 
 Regular (> 100 in lifetime) 
 ('bogus pipeline' used to increase self‐report validity)
Notes