Effects of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign on Youths

Effects of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign on Youths
复制标题

DOI:
10.2105/ajph.2007.125849
复制
发表时间:
2008-12-01
影响因子:
12.7
通讯作者:
Kalton, Graham
Kalton, Graham
中科院分区:
医学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Hornik, Robert;Jacobsohn, Lela;Kalton, Graham

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

目标。我们研究了全国青少年禁毒媒体运动对12.5至18岁青少年的认知和行为影响,并报告了核心评估结果。方法。从1999年9月到2004年6月,对3个具有全国代表性的9至18岁美国青少年群体进行了4次在家调查。样本量从第一轮的 8117 人到第四轮的 5126 人(第一轮答复率为 65%,随后接受采访的仍然符合条件的青少年为 86%-93%)。主要结果是自我报告的一生、过去一年和过去 30 天的大麻使用情况和相关认知。结果。大多数分析表明该活动没有产生任何影响。然而,在一轮中,更多的广告曝光预示着下一轮中避免吸食大麻的意愿会降低(gamma= -0.07;95% 置信区间 [CI]=-0.13,-0.01),并且反毒品社会规范会较弱(gamma=-0.05;95% CI=-0.08,-0.02)。第 3 轮的暴露预测第 4 轮开始吸食大麻(gamma=0.11;95% CI =0.00, 0.22)。结论。到 2004 年 6 月为止,该运动不太可能对青少年产生有利影响,而且可能会延迟产生不利影响。评估对该活动的实用性提出了质疑。 (美国公共卫生杂志。2008;98:2229-2236。doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.125849)
Objectives. We examined the cognitive and behavioral effects of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign on youths aged 12.5 to 18 years and report core evaluation results.Methods. From September 1999 to June 2004, 3 nationally representative cohorts of US youths aged 9 to 18 years were surveyed at home 4 times. Sample size ranged from 8117 in the first to 5126 in the fourth round (65% first-round response rate, with 86%-93% of still eligible youths interviewed subsequently). Main outcomes were self-reported lifetime, past-year, and past-30-day marijuana use and related cognitions.Results. Most analyses showed no effects from the campaign. At one round, however, more ad exposure predicted less intention to avoid marijuana use (gamma= -0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]=-0.13, -0.01) and weaker antidrug social norms (gamma=-0.05; 95% CI=-0.08, -0.02) at the subsequent round. Exposure at round 3 predicted marijuana initiation at round 4 (gamma=0.11; 95% CI =0.00, 0.22).Conclusions. Through June 2004, the campaign is unlikely to have had favorable effects on youths and may have had delayed unfavorable effects. The evaluation challenges the usefulness of the campaign. (Am J Public Health. 2008;98:2229-2236. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.125849)