The impact of anti-tobacco industry prevention messages in tobacco producing regions:: evidence from the US truth® campaign

被引:58
作者
Thrasher, JF
Niederdeppe, J
Farrelly, MC
Davis, KC
Ribisl, KM
Haviland, ML
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Behav & Hlth Educ, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[2] RTI Int, Res Triangle Pk, NC USA
[3] Amer Legacy Fdn, Washington, DC USA
关键词
D O I
10.1136/tc.2003.006403
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Adolescents who live in tobacco producing regions may not respond favourably to anti-industry ads. Objective: To examine whether state level involvement in tobacco production appears to limit the effectiveness of anti-industry ads to prevent tobacco use among adolescents in the USA. Design: Time trend analyses were done using repeated cross sectional data from six waves of the Legacy Media Tracking Survey, which were collected between 1999 and 2003. Setting and participants: 28 307 adolescents, ages 12 - 17 years, were classified as living in: tobacco producing states (TPS) ( n = 1929); non-tobacco producing states (non-TPS) with low tobacco control funding comparable to TPS ( n = 5323); non-TPS with relatively high funding ( n = 15 076); and non-TPS with established anti-industry ad campaigns ( n = 5979). Main outcome measures: Reactions to anti-industry ads; strength of anti-industry attitudes/beliefs; changes in anti-industry attitudes/beliefs over time. Results: Ad reactions did not differ by state type. Multivariate adjusted time trend analyses indicated significant, comparable increases in anti-industry attitudes/beliefs since the onset of the truth(r) campaign, in both TPS and non-TPS. Mediation analyses indicated that these increases were due, in part, to campaign exposure. Conclusions: Adolescents who live in tobacco producing regions appear to be as responsive to anti-industry ads as their counterparts in non-tobacco producing regions. This study provides further evidence for the effectiveness of such ads.
引用
收藏
页码:283 / 288
页数:6
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]  
Altman D G, 1996, Tob Control, V5, P192, DOI 10.1136/tc.5.3.192
[2]  
*AM LEG FDN, 2002, WHAT YOUTHS THINK TO
[3]  
[Anonymous], STAND DEF FIN DISP C
[4]   Tobacco control advocates must demand high-quality media campaigns: the California experience [J].
Balbach, ED ;
Glantz, SA .
TOBACCO CONTROL, 1998, 7 (04) :397-408
[5]   Changes in youth cigarette use and intentions following implementation of a tobacco control program - Findings from the Florida Youth Tobacco Survey, 1998-2000 [J].
Bauer, UE ;
Johnson, TM ;
Hopkins, RS ;
Brooks, RG .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 284 (06) :723-728
[6]  
CDC, 2001, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, V50, P1
[7]  
*CDCP, 2000, STAT TOB CONTR HIGHL
[8]  
*CDCP, 2001, INV TOB CONTR STAT H
[9]   Price, tobacco control policies and smoking among young adults [J].
Chaloupka, FJ ;
Wechsler, H .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1997, 16 (03) :359-373
[10]   TESTS OF EQUALITY BETWEEN SETS OF COEFFICIENTS IN 2 LINEAR REGRESSIONS [J].
CHOW, GC .
ECONOMETRICA, 1960, 28 (03) :591-605