File(s) not publicly available
Is restricting tobacco sales the answer to adolescent smoking?
journal contribution
posted on 2003-11-01, 00:00 authored by M Staff, Catherine BennettCatherine Bennett, P AngelBackground: Enforcement of legislation restricting retail access to tobacco is increasingly relied on to reduce adolescent smoking rates. In 1996, health authorities in the Northern Sydney Health Area began monitoring tobacco retailer compliance (PROOF program) with staged purchase attempts by adolescents below the legal age (18 years).
Methods: Repeat cross-sectional surveys before (1995) and after (2000) the introduction of PROOF monitored changes in adolescent smoking behaviour. Students aged 12 to 17 years from 11 Northern Sydney metropolitan public secondary schools were surveyed for self-reported smoking and tobacco purchasing behavior in 1995 (n = 5,206) and 2000 (n = 4,120).
Results: Between 1996 and 2000, 545 retailer compliance checks found 34% unlawfully sold cigarettes to minors and 28% of these repeated the offence. Nine prosecutions resulted. Modelling revealed a significant association between the intervention and never having smoked (adjusted OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.01–1.33) although there was no significant association with being a current smoker. The odds of being a smoker were greater for students from coeducational schools, with this effect being modified by gender.
Conclusions: There was no reduction in adolescent smoking with active enforcement of tobacco access laws despite an apparent increase in students who reported never to have smoked.
Methods: Repeat cross-sectional surveys before (1995) and after (2000) the introduction of PROOF monitored changes in adolescent smoking behaviour. Students aged 12 to 17 years from 11 Northern Sydney metropolitan public secondary schools were surveyed for self-reported smoking and tobacco purchasing behavior in 1995 (n = 5,206) and 2000 (n = 4,120).
Results: Between 1996 and 2000, 545 retailer compliance checks found 34% unlawfully sold cigarettes to minors and 28% of these repeated the offence. Nine prosecutions resulted. Modelling revealed a significant association between the intervention and never having smoked (adjusted OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.01–1.33) although there was no significant association with being a current smoker. The odds of being a smoker were greater for students from coeducational schools, with this effect being modified by gender.
Conclusions: There was no reduction in adolescent smoking with active enforcement of tobacco access laws despite an apparent increase in students who reported never to have smoked.
History
Journal
Preventive medicineVolume
37Issue
5Pagination
529 - 533Publisher
Academic PressLocation
San Diego, Calif.Publisher DOI
ISSN
0091-7435eISSN
1096-0260Language
engPublication classification
C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journalCopyright notice
2003 American Health Foundation and Elsevier Inc.Usage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedKeywords
smokingprevention and controllegislation and jurisprudenceadolescenceprogram evaluationpublic health practiceScience & TechnologyLife Sciences & BiomedicinePublic, Environmental & Occupational HealthMedicine, General & InternalGeneral & Internal Medicinesmoking, prevention and controlsmoking, legislation and jurisprudencepublic health practice, legislation and jurisprudenceACCESS
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC