ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether media advocacy activities implemented by the Florida Tobacco Control Program contributed to increased news coverage, policy changes and reductions in youth smoking. METHODS: A content analysis of news coverage appearing in Florida newspapers between 22 April 1998 and 31 December 2001 was conducted, and patterns of coverage before and after the implementation of media advocacy efforts to promote tobacco product placement ordinances were compared. Event history analysis was used to assess whether news coverage increased the probability of enacting these ordinances in 23 of 67 Florida counties and ordinary least square (OLS) regression was used to gauge the effect of these policies on changes in youth smoking prevalence. RESULTS: The volume of programme-related news coverage decreased after the onset of media advocacy efforts, but the ratio of coverage about Students Working Against Tobacco (the Florida Tobacco Control Program's youth advocacy organisation) relative to other topics increased. News coverage contributed to the passage of tobacco product placement ordinances in Florida counties, but these ordinances did not lead to reduced youth smoking. CONCLUSION: This study adds to the growing literature supporting the use of media advocacy as a tool to change health-related policies. However, results suggest caution in choosing policy goals that may or may not influence health behaviour.
Subject(s)
Mass Media , Newspapers as Topic , Smoking Cessation/methods , Smoking Prevention , Adolescent , Consumer Advocacy , Florida/epidemiology , Health Promotion/methods , Humans , Policy Making , Public Policy , Smoking/epidemiologyABSTRACT
This research is designed to share valuable experiences and transferable principles from program staff of the Legacy/Community Voices initiative who have been involved in planning, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining tobacco control activities in underserved communities. Interviews were conducted with 13 front line staff from 9 sites: Alameda County, California; Detroit, Michigan; El Paso, Texas; Ingham County, Michigan; Miami, Florida; New Mexico; North Carolina; Northern Manhattan; and West Virginia. A model emerged from these interviews that places the life cycle of a program in a central position, with many of the identified themes (working with local champions, obtaining support from multiple partners, increasing organizational capacity) repeated throughout, albeit in different forms at different stages. Reflecting upon wisdom gained and identifying best processes for such work may help ensure that tobacco control programs are developed that are culturally safe and effective in meeting the needs of diverse communities throughout the United States.
Subject(s)
Community Health Planning/organization & administration , Health Policy , Health Services Accessibility , Tobacco Use Cessation/ethnology , Tobacco Use Disorder/ethnology , Tobacco Use Disorder/prevention & control , Vulnerable Populations/ethnology , Community Participation , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Medically Underserved Area , Program Development , Social Justice , Socioeconomic Factors , United States , WorkplaceABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess how current practice in middle school substance use prevention programs compares with seven recommended guidelines adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for school-based tobacco use prevention programs. METHODS: Substance use prevention practice was analyzed using data from a 1999 mailed questionnaire of a nationally representative sample of 1496 public and private schools with middle school grades that reported having a substance use prevention program. Respondents answered questions about substance use prevention education and activities in the whole school and in their own classroom. Weighted prevalence estimates for the seven recommendations are presented, and multiple regression was used to analyze correlates of implementation of the recommendations. RESULTS: An estimated 64.2% of schools met four or more of the recommendations for school-based substance use prevention practice; 4.0% met all seven recommendations. Schools were most likely to report having and enforcing substance use prevention policies (84.3%) and least likely to report training teachers in substance use prevention (17.9%). More recommendations were implemented in schools that were public and had larger enrollments, greater perceived availability of resources, greater school board and parental support for substance use prevention, and had hired a school substance use prevention coordinator. CONCLUSIONS: The low prevalence of comprehensive substance use prevention programs in U.S. middle schools may limit the potential impact of school programs on the prevalence of youth substance use.
