4.3 Article

A Longitudinal Study of Predictors for Adolescent Electronic Cigarette Experimentation and Comparison with Conventional Smoking

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15020305

关键词

electronic cigarette; adolescents; smoking; predictors; school survey

资金

  1. Academy of Finland, Helsinki, Finland [135019, 288774]
  2. Competitive Research Funding of the Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
  3. Academy of Finland [288774]
  4. Academy of Finland (AKA) [135019, 288774, 288774, 135019] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Little is known of the predictors of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use among adolescents, even though the use is increasing. We studied here the predictors for e-cigarette experimentation (tried and tried more than twice) and compared them with predictors for conventional smoking. A baseline school survey was conducted in the Helsinki metropolitan area, Finland, in 2011 for seventh graders (12 to 13-year-olds). Response rate was 73%. The same students were followed up in 2014 (9th grade, 15 to 16-year-olds), N = 5742. Generalized linear mixed models controlling for school clustering were used. In the follow-up, 43.3% of boys and 25.6% of girls had tried e-cigarettes and 21.9% and 8.1% correspondingly more than twice. The strongest predictors for both genders were conventional smoking, drunkenness and energy drink use. Furthermore, poor academic achievement predicted e-cigarette experimentation for both genders, and for boys, participation in team sports was a predictor. The predictors for experimenting and for experimenting more than twice were very similar, except for boys' participation in team sports. They were also similar compared to the predictors of conventional smoking but the associations were weaker. To conclude, smoking and other addictive behaviors predict adolescents' experimentation with e-cigarettes. Family's socioeconomic background had little significance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据