| Title |
Effects on alcohol use of a Swedish school-based prevention program for early adolescents: a longitudinal study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-016-3947-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Beckman, Mikael Svensson, Susanna Geidne, Charli Eriksson |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to address the lack of evaluations of school-based substance use prevention programs and to conduct a quasi-experimental evaluation of the alcohol use part of the Triad intervention. Eleven Swedish intervention schools (285 pupils) and three control schools (159 pupils) participated in the evaluation. Baseline measurements were conducted in 2011 before the alcohol part in the prevention program was implemented in the intervention schools (school year 6, ages 12-13). We estimated an Intention-To-Treat (ITT) Difference-in-Difference (DD) model to analyze the effectiveness of the intervention on subsequent alcohol use measured in grades 7, 8 and 9. The main results show no effect on the likelihood of drinking alcohol or drinking to intoxication. The lack of positive effects highlights the need for policy-makers and public health officials need to carefully consider and evaluate prevention programs in order to ensure that they are worthwhile from school, health, and societal perspectives. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 18% |
| Chile | 2 | 12% |
| Russia | 1 | 6% |
| Sweden | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 65% |
| Scientists | 3 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 19% |
| Psychology | 6 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,742,835
of 25,196,456 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,455
of 16,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,087
of 433,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#72
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,196,456 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 433,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.