The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A randomised controlled trial of a community intervention to prevent adolescent tobacco use
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Experimental evaluation of comprehensive community wide programme to prevent adolescent tobacco use. DESIGN: Eight pairs of small Oregon communities (population 1700 to 13 500) were randomly assigned to receive a school based prevention programme or the school based programme plus a community programme. Effects were assessed through five annual surveys (time 1-5) of seventh and ninth grade (ages 12-15 years) students. INTERVENTION: The community programme included: (a) media advocacy, (b) youth anti-tobacco activities, (c) family communications about tobacco use, and (d) reduction of youth access to tobacco. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The prevalence of self reported smoking and smokeless tobacco use in the week before assessment. RESULTS: The community programme had significant effects on the prevalence of weekly cigarette use at times 2 and 5 and the effect approached significance at time 4. An effect on the slope of prevalence across time points was evident only when time 2 data points were eliminated from the analysis. The intervention affected the prevalence of smokeless tobacco among grade 9 boys at time 2. There were also significant effects on the slope of alcohol use among ninth graders and the quadratic slope of marijuana for all students. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that comprehensive community wide interventions can improve on the preventive effect of school based tobacco prevention programmes and that effective tobacco prevention may prevent other substance use.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A meta-analysis of smoking prevention programs after adjustment for errors in the unit of analysis
Rooney, B. L., & Murray, D. M. (1996) · Health Education Quarterly · doi:10.1177/109019819602300104 · Cited by 254
Cited by
(2009) · Cited by 2,013
The (mis)estimation of neighborhood effects: causal inference for a practicable social epidemiology
Oakes, J. M. (2004) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.08.004 · Cited by 760
Why Interventions to Influence Adolescent Behavior Often Fail but Could Succeed
Yeager, D. S., Dahl, R. E., & Dweck, C. S. (2018) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691617722620 · Cited by 512
Effective ingredients of school-based drug prevention programs
Cuijpers, P. (2002) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/s0306-4603(02)00295-2 · Cited by 466
Community interventions and effective prevention.
Wandersman, A., & Florin, P. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.6-7.441 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Biglan, A.
- Venue
- Tobacco Control
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2000-03-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 24-32
- ISSN
- 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2106030729
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A randomised controlled trial of a community intervention to prevent adolescent tobacco use. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/tc.9.1.24
- The paper
- Biglan, A. (2000). A randomised controlled trial of a community intervention to prevent adolescent tobacco use. Tobacco Control. https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.9.1.24
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.