A systematic review of school-based marijuana and alcohol prevention programs targeting adolescents aged 10–15
Abstract
Aims: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine if school-based marijuana and alcohol prevention programs are effective in preventing marijuana and alcohol use in adolescents between the ages of 10–15 years. In particular, we examined knowledge versus comprehensive type prevention programs in order to better understand the inconsistency of results in school-based marijuana and alcohol prevention programs found in the literature. Methods: We performed a systematic literature review to identify published or unpublished papers between January 01, 1980 and December 02, 2007 that reviewed the long-term effectiveness (1 year or longer) of school-based marijuana and alcohol primary prevention programs targeting adolescents aged 10–15 years. Results: Long-term marijuana and alcohol prevention programs that utilized a “comprehensive” program content resulted in: (a) a mean absolute reduction of 12 days of alcohol usage per month and (b) a mean absolute reduction of 7 days of marijuana usage per month among adolescents aged 10–15 years old. In comparison, school-based marijuana and alcohol prevention programs that utilized “knowledge only” program content resulted in a mean absolute decrease of 2 days of alcohol usage per month among adolescents aged 10–15 years old. Only one study used knowledge-based content and marijuana use as an outcome measure and as such statistical pooling was not possible. Conclusions: The most effective primary prevention programs for reducing marijuana and alcohol use among adolescents aged 10–15 years in the long-term were comprehensive programs that included anti-drug information combined with refusal skills, self-management skills and social-skills training.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The most effective primary prevention programs for reducing marijuana and alcohol use among adolescents aged 10-15 years in the long term are comprehensive programs that included antidrug information combined with refusal skills, self-management skills, and social skills training.
“The most effective primary prevention programs for reducing marijuana and alcohol use among adolescents aged 10–15 years in the long term are comprehensive programs that included antidrug information combined with refusal skills, self-management skills, and social skills training.”
From Interventions for Adolescent Substance Abuse: An Overview of Systematic Reviews (2016) · cites this paper as [64]
School-based marijuana and alcohol prevention programs are effective in preventing marijuana and alcohol use in adolescents between the ages of 10 and 15 years.
“School-based marijuana and alcohol prevention programs are found to be effective in preventing marijuana and alcohol use in adolescents between the ages of 10 and 15 years [64].”
From Interventions for Adolescent Substance Abuse: An Overview of Systematic Reviews (2016) · cites this paper as [64]
Cites
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Miller, J. Y. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.64 · Cited by 5,428 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Interventions for Adolescent Substance Abuse: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
Das, J. K., Salam, R. A., Arshad, A., Finkelstein, Y., & Bhutta, Z. A. (2016) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.06.021 · Cited by 481 · see citing works
Weight-loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
Rogers, M., Lemstra, M., Bird, Y., Nwankwo, C., & Moraros, J. (2016) · Patient Preference and Adherence · doi:10.2147/ppa.s103649 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Self-citationPhysical activity interventions in the school setting: A systematic review
Demetriou, Y., & Höner, O. (2012) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.11.006 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Gaiha, S. M., Salisbury, T. T., Usmani, S., Koschorke, M., Raman, U., & Petticrew, M. (2021) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-021-03350-8 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Primary Prevention of Cannabis Use: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
Norberg, M. M., Kezelman, S., & Lim-Howe, N. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053187 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lemstra, M., Bennett, N., Nannapaneni, U., Neudorf, C., Warren, L., Kershaw, T., & Scott, C.
- Affiliations
- Saskatchewan Health Authority (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Lemstra, Mark
- Venue
- Addiction Research & Theory
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 84-96
- ISSN
- 1058-6989 (ISSN-L)
- 1606-6359
- 1476-7392
- OpenAlex
- W2082713321
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 0.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Addiction Research & Theory (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Social Sciences › Demography › Youth, Drugs, and Violence
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Keywords
- school-based prevention, alcohol prevention, adolescents, primary prevention, refusal skills, self-management skills, social skills training
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