title: Examining the impact of changes in school tobacco control policies and programs on current smoking and susceptibility to future smoking among youth in the first two years of the COMPASS study: looking back to move forward.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  School-based prevention activities continue to be an important tobacco control resource, however there is little guidance for school-based tobacco control programming within Ontario. The objective of this study is to identify real-world changes in school-based tobacco control programs or policies in the COMPASS study and examine of those interventions (natural experiments) had any impact on the school-level prevalence of smoking susceptibility and current smoking over time.
  
  
  METHODS
  This paper uses longitudinal school-level smoking behaviour data from Year 1 (Y1: 2012-13) and Year 2 (Y2: 2013-14) of the COMPASS study. Changes to school-level tobacco control programs and policies were measured using the COMPASS School Programs and Policies Questionnaire and knowledge broker follow-up interviews. Quasi-experimental tests of proportion and difference-in-difference models were used to evaluate the impact of the interventions identified between Y1 and Y2 on school-level prevalence of smoking susceptibility among never smokers and current smoking.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Between Y1 and Y2, 17 schools reported a change in their tobacco control programming or policies. In four of the intervention schools, the increase in the within-school prevalence of susceptible never smokers between Y1 and Y2 was significantly greater than the natural change observed in the control schools. In five of the intervention schools, the decrease in the within-school prevalence of current smokers between Y1 and Y2 was significantly greater than the natural change observed in the control schools. Only two of the new interventions evaluated (both focused on policies of progressive punishment for students caught smoking on school property), were associated with significant desirable changes in both smoking susceptibility and current smoking between Y1 and Y2.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Interventions specific to effective and enforced tobacco control were the most common and consistently had the desired impact on the school-level prevalence of smoking susceptibility and current smoking. Due to the variation in the types of interventions implemented and their effectiveness, additional evaluation evidence is necessary to determine the most successful activities and contexts among individual students. The results presented here highlight which of these real-world promising interventions should be further evaluated using the longitudinal individual-level data in COMPASS over time.
authors.affiliation: School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1 Canada.
authors.forename: Scott T
authors.initials: ST
authors.lastname: Leatherdale
authors.affiliation: School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1 Canada.
authors.forename: Adam
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Cole
keywords: Adolescence; Intervention evaluation; Policy; Program; Schools; Smoking; Tobacco; Youth
references.citation: BMJ. 2000 Aug 5;321(7257):333-7
references.pmid: 10926588
references.citation: Tob Control. 2001 Jun;10(2):117-23
references.pmid: 11387531
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 1999 Dec;89(12):1827-31
references.pmid: 10589310
references.citation: J Adolesc Health. 2005 Oct;37(4):330-6
references.pmid: 16182144
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2013 Jun 11;13:569
references.pmid: 23758659
references.citation: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002 Mar;56(3):227-32
references.pmid: 11854347
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2007 Apr;97(4):648-54
references.pmid: 17329662
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2006 Mar;96(3):406-9
references.pmid: 16449580
references.citation: Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Feb 21;10(2):729-41
references.pmid: 23429753
references.citation: Nicotine Tob Res. 1999;1 Suppl 2:S111-4; discussion 569-70
references.pmid: 11768166
references.citation: Am J Health Behav. 2005 Nov-Dec;29(6):520-30
references.pmid: 16336107
references.citation: Prev Med. 2013 Aug;57(2):113-9
references.pmid: 23668990
references.citation: Health Psychol. 1996 Sep;15(5):355-61
references.pmid: 8891714
references.citation: Public Health. 2005 Sep;119(9):751-7
references.pmid: 15913681
references.citation: J Adolesc Health. 2005 Mar;36(3):162-9
references.pmid: 15737770
references.citation: Tob Control. 2014 Jul;23(4):295-301
references.pmid: 23716172
references.citation: Can J Public Health. 2007 Jan-Feb;98(1):30-2
references.pmid: 17278674
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2014 Apr 08;14:331
references.pmid: 24712314
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2000 May 1;59 Suppl 1:S61-81
references.pmid: 10773438
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2010 Jul;100(7):1161-3
references.pmid: 20530757
references.citation: Addict Behav. 2014 Sep;39(9):1329-36
references.pmid: 24837756
references.citation: Health Rep. 2012 Mar;23(1):47-53
references.pmid: 22590805
references.citation: Prev Chronic Dis. 2010 Nov;7(6):A129
references.pmid: 20950536