Facilitating conditions for staff's confidence to enforce school tobacco policies: qualitative analysis from seven European cities.

BACKGROUND: School staff members' consistent enforcement of school tobacco policies (STPs) is needed to decrease adolescent smoking and exposure to tobacco smoke. Staff's confidence, indicating their perceived ability to cope with students' negative responses, explains variations in staff's STPs enforcement, yet understanding of the determinants for confidence is lacking. We analyzed the conditions in which the staff feel confident in addressing students who violate STPs to support staff's enforcement.  METHODS: Data consists of 81 semi-structured interviews with the staff members from 26 secondary schools in seven European cities in Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, and Portugal. In every city, 3-4 staff members (senior management, teachers, supportive staff) in 3-4 schools (academic-vocational, high-low SES area) were interviewed. Transcripts were analyzed with thematic analysis. RESULTS: When staff felt confident in their ability to prevent, diminish, or handle students' negative responses, they were more likely to address students on STP violations. The staff was more confident (1) when consistent policy enforcement within school and regarding the wider society ensured staff legitimacy for STPs enforcement, (2) when dialog and mutual familiarity with students allowed the staff to facilitate constructive interaction with STP violators, and (3) when organizational backup structures provided staff collegial support to overcome challenges in the enforcement. These conditions would support consistent enforcement, especially with persistent misbehavers and among the more uncertain staff members. CONCLUSIONS: Our study stresses the need to implement strategies at multiple levels to strengthen staff's confidence for STP enforcement. To support staff's legitimacy for enforcement, we suggest reinforcing structures and practices that facilitate consistency in STP enforcement; to support staff's ability for constructive interaction with STP violators, we suggest strengthening staff's social and emotional learning; and to support staff's experience of collegial support, we suggest reinforcing staff's collective ability to cope with students' negative responses.

Are Danish vocational schools ready to implement "smoke-free school hours"? A qualitative study informed by the theory of organizational readiness for change.

BACKGROUND: The smoking prevalence is high among students enrolled in vocational education and training, which is considered a lower level of education. The school tobacco policy regarding smoke-free school hours stipulates that students and staff are not allowed to smoke during school hours-inside or outside school premises-and it might be an effective intervention for reducing smoking in vocational schools. For school tobacco policies to be effective, they must be appropriately implemented. A primary predictor for successful implementation is organizational readiness for change. This study seeks to identify and understand the barriers to and facilitators for developing organizational readiness to implement smoke-free school hours in Danish vocational schools. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were carried out with managers and teachers (n = 22 participants) from six vocational schools. The interview guides were informed by "A theory of organizational readiness for change" developed by Weiner, which was also used as a framework to analyze the data. RESULTS: We identified 13 facilitators and barriers. Nine factors acted as facilitators, including the following: believing that health promotion is a school role and duty; believing that society and workplaces are becoming more smoke-free, and believing that smoke-free school hours is a beneficial strategy to achieve fewer educational interruptions. Additional facilitators include establishing clear rules for sanctioning and enforcement, developing a joint understanding about smoke-free school hours, developing skills to deal with student responses to smoke-free school hours, establishing social alternatives to smoking, offering smoking cessation help, and mandating smoke-free school hours by law. Four organizational norms, practices, or discourses acted as barriers: believing that smoke-free school hours violate personal freedom, believing that students have more important problems than smoking, believing that it is difficult to administer the level of enforcement, and believing that the enforcement of smoke-free school hours negatively influences student-teacher relations. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that developing organizational readiness before adopting a comprehensive tobacco policy such as smoke-free school hours is important for successful implementation. Further research should investigate how to strengthen the facilitators for and counter the barriers to developing readiness for implementing smoke-free school hours.

Using the realist approach to unravel the complexity of health programmes: the evaluation of smoke-free school policies as a case study.

Numerous commentaries plea for the use of methods that take into account complexity when evaluating health programmes. These commentaries provide compelling arguments on why evaluations of health programmes should not rely exclusively on methods that were designed for making universal claims about whether and to what extent a policy is effective. However, there exist only few concrete examples showing how to take this complexity into account during the evaluation of health programmes. One increasingly popular approach to do so is the realist approach. In this paper, we explain the realist approach for taking into account complexity, discuss how we applied this approach to study the impact of smoke-free school policies and reflect on the practical value of the resultant insights. We hope this case study may inspire fellow scholars to use the realist approach for evaluating health programmes.

School tobacco policies and adolescent smoking in six European cities in 2013 and 2016: A school-level longitudinal study.

Assessment of the effectiveness of school tobacco policies (STPs) in reducing adolescent smoking remains inconclusive. Previous studies took insufficient account of different dimensions of STPs, the different views of students and staff, and policy changes over time. This study assessed how a multidimensional STP, as perceived by students and staff, was associated with adolescent smoking over time in six European cities. The SILNE and SILNE-R surveys were conducted among students (n = 18,502) and staff (n = 438) in 38 schools in 2013 and 2016. Three dimensions (comprehensiveness, enforcement, and communication) were assessed and we calculated total STP scores. Multilevel logistic regressions estimated associations of STPs with adolescent smoking on and just outside school premises and with weekly smoking. Further analyses estimated associations between 2013 and 2016 STP changes and smoking outcomes in 2016, controlling for STP and smoking prevalence in 2013. On average, there were few increases in STP scores over time. Greater STP enforcement, as perceived by students, was associated with lower odds of weekly smoking (OR:0.93, 95%CI:0.89-0.97) and of smoking on school premises (OR:0.80, 95%CI:0.72-0.90). Higher total STP scores were associated with lower odds of smoking on school premises (OR:0.76, 95%CI:0.67-0.86), but not of smoking just outside premises or smoking weekly. Greater increases in STP scores over time were associated with lower odds of smoking on school premises in 2016 (OR:0.65, 95%CI:0.47-0.89). Well-enforced STPs may help reduce adolescent smoking at school. Schools should be supported in adopting comprehensive policies that also extend to the surroundings of their premises.

Smoke-free school policies in Europe: Challenges for the future.

Scholars commonly plea for the development and evaluation of new tobacco control interventions to further decrease smoking and exposure to second-hand smoke. We, in addition, emphasize there is still much that can be done to improve the impact of current tobacco control interventions. This commentary makes a specific case for improving the implementation of smoke-free school policies across Europe.

Why staff at European schools abstain from enforcing smoke-free policies on persistent violators.

Secondary schools in European countries increasingly implement comprehensive smoke-free school policies (SFSPs) that prohibit most or even all adolescents from smoking during school hours. Consistent enforcement of SFSPs is essential for realizing optimum effectiveness. A main challenge represents adolescents who persistently violate the rules. We studied how staff in European countries respond to these persistent violators and why they may turn a blind eye. We used interview transcripts from 69 staff members at 22 schools in 6 European countries to identify cases in which staff turned a blind eye. We then applied thematic analysis for identifying the considerations as to why they turn a blind eye. Turning a blind eye on persistent violators happened among school staff in all six countries. Three considerations were identified. First, staff believe their primary role and duty is to support all adolescents to develop into well-functioning adults, and sometimes it is best to accept smoking. Second, staff expect that applying stricter disciplinary measures will not stop persistent violators and is more likely to create more severe problems. Third, staff do not feel supported by relevant actors in society (e.g. parents) in influencing adolescent smoking. We conclude that staff's considerations stress the need to support school staff in enforcing the increasingly comprehensive rules on the most persistent smokers.

The Association Between Smoke-Free School Policies and Adolescents' Perceived Antismoking Norms: Moderation by School Connectedness.

INTRODUCTION: Many European schools implement smoke-free school policies (SFSPs). SFSPs may decrease adolescent smoking by causing adolescents to perceive stronger antismoking norms, yet there exists no quantitative evidence that indicates for which norms and for whom such effects may occur. This study therefore assessed to what extent adolescents' perceived antismoking norms among best friends, teachers, and society at large were associated with SFSPs, and whether these associations were moderated by adolescents' level of school connectedness. AIMS AND METHODS: Survey data were collected in 2016/2017 on 10,653 adolescents aged 14-16 years old and 315 staff members in 55 schools from seven European cities. Associations of adolescent-perceived SFSPs and staff-reported SFSPs with best friend, teacher, and societal antismoking norms were estimated in multilevel logistic regression models, adjusted for demographics and school-level smoking prevalence. We tested for interaction between school connectedness and SFSPs. RESULTS: Adolescent-perceived SFSPs were positively associated with antismoking norms by teachers (odds ratio [OR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.85), were negatively associated with antismoking norms by best friends (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67-0.99), but were not significantly associated with antismoking norms by society at large (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74-1.02). All interaction tests between adolescent-perceived SFSPs and school connectedness were nonsignificant. Staff-reported SFSPs were not associated with any norm and showed no significant interaction with school connectedness. CONCLUSIONS: We found that SFSPs are associated with adolescents' perception of more antismoking norms by teachers, but less antismoking norms by best friends, irrespective of adolescents' level of school connectedness. IMPLICATIONS: Smoke-free school policies, just as many other tobacco control policies, are assumed to foster adolescents' perception of antismoking norms. Still, current evidence does not demonstrate which antismoking norms may be influenced by SFSPs and whether this influence is equal for adolescents with different levels of school connectedness. This study suggests that SFSPs foster adolescents' perception of antismoking norms by teachers, but may concurrently lead to the perception of less antismoking norms by best friends, irrespective of adolescents' school connectedness. SFSPs may therefore need to be complemented with interventions that target antismoking norms in adolescent peer groups.

Transnational tobacco companies and the mechanism of externalization: A realist synthesis.

Externalization theory assumes that risks and costs are systematically displaced from high-income countries (HICs) to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We review how and why transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) influence the local circumstances of LMICs that trigger externalization mechanisms, leading to tobacco-attributable risk outcomes. Our realist synthesis of scientific evidence and gray literature identifies externalization mechanisms with risk outcomes at the level of health policy, smoking trends, and tobacco production. The results reveal the mediating role of local and global third parties and intermediaries. Externalization mechanisms produce systematic tobacco-attributable inequalities between places located in HICs and those located in LMICs.

Why Secondary Schools Do Not Implement Far-Reaching Smoke-Free Policies: Exploring Deep Core, Policy Core, and Secondary Beliefs of School Staff in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Secondary schools that implement smoke-free policies are confronted with students who start smoking outside their premises. One solution is to complement smoke-free policies with prohibitions for all students to leave the school area during school hours, technically making school hours a smoke-free period. However, there are strikingly few Dutch secondary schools that implement this approach. This study explores why staff members in the Netherlands decide not to implement smoke-free school hours for all students. METHOD: We interviewed 13 staff members, with different functions, from four secondary schools. The analysis was informed by the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to delve into the values, rationales, and assumptions of staff with the aim to identify deep core, policy core, and secondary beliefs. RESULTS: We identified six beliefs. Two deep core beliefs are that schools should provide adolescents the freedom to learn how to responsibly use their personal autonomy and that schools should only interfere if adolescents endanger or bother others. Three policy core beliefs identified included the following: that smoking is not a pressing issue for schools to deal with; that schools should demarcate their jurisdiction to intervene in adolescents' lives in time, space, and precise risk behavior; and that implementing smoke-free school hours would interfere with maintaining positive student-staff relationships. One secondary belief identified was that smoke-free school hours would be impossible to enforce consistently. CONCLUSION: This paper was the first to demonstrate the many beliefs explaining why schools refrain from voluntary implementing far-reaching smoke-free policies.

Smoking beliefs across genders, a comparative analysis of seven European countries.

BACKGROUND: Most European countries have seen a decrease in the prevalence of adolescent smoking. This decrease has, however, been patterned by gender. Girls' smoking rates have now overtaken boys' in many European countries. The two genders may not, however, share the same smoking beliefs and this could explain differences between the genders in smoking prevalence. We describe gender differences in smoking beliefs and investigate variations between countries, along with their gender context. METHODS: In 2016, we conducted the SILNE R study (Smoking Inequalities Learning from Natural Experiments - Renew) in 55 schools located in seven European countries: Belgium, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, Finland, Ireland, and Germany. We surveyed 12,979 students aged 14-16 years (50% were girls). We classified smoking beliefs into four categories: positive individual, positive social, negative individual, and negative social beliefs. We expected girls to score higher on the last three of those categories and we hypothesized that countries with a more gender-equal culture would have less gender difference in beliefs about smoking. RESULTS: One out of two smoking beliefs differed significantly between genders. Negative social beliefs were more common in girls, while beliefs about the dating-related aspects of smoking were more common in boys. We identified Germany and Belgium as the only countries with no gender differences in any of the belief scales. No correlation was found, however, between these scales and the Gender Inequality Index. CONCLUSIONS: In some countries, gender-specific interventions might be implemented; however, two opposing strategies might be used, depending on whether such programs are aimed at boys or girls.

Adolescents' smoking environment under weak tobacco control: A mixed methods study for Portugal.

INTRODUCTION: Bans on smoking in public places and on sales to minors have been widely implemented across the globe. However, many countries have either adopted non-comprehensive (i.e., partial) bans and/or weakly enforce those bans. Little is known, from the adolescents' perspective, how this affects their smoking-related perceptions and behaviors. We studied the case of Portugal, where bans are partial and/or weakly enforced. We sought to understand how the bans affect adolescents' access to cigarettes from commercial sources, the visibility of smoking in public places, and smoking locations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used a mixed methods design on data gathered in 2016. Quantitative, cross-sectional surveys were conducted in six schools (n = 2,444) in Coimbra, Portugal. In two of these schools, qualitative data were collected in eight single-sex focus group interviews (n = 42). RESULTS: Ninety-five percent of the adolescents who tried to buy cigarettes were able to do so from commercial sources, through vending machines, or directly from the vendor. Bans on smoking on school premises and at enclosed public places did not prevent these adolescents from observing smoking outside school gates (84.0%), in cafes and restaurants (97%), or from smoking at cafes, bars, or nightclubs (72.9%). DISCUSSION: Partial and/or weakly enforced policies seem to not prevent adolescents from having access to cigarettes, frequently seeing smoking, and finding ample opportunities to smoke in public places. Adopting and enforcing comprehensive policies are necessary efforts to prevent unfavorable responses and more effectively reduce adolescents' smoking behavior.

The visibility of smoking in Europe and its relationship with youth's positive beliefs about smoking.

OBJECTIVES: To determine adolescent-reported visibility of smoking in different public and private spaces in Europe and associations between smoking visibility and beliefs about the benefits of smoking. METHODS: We used SILNE-R cross-sectional survey data (2016/2017) of 10,798 14-16-year-old students from 55 secondary schools in seven European cities. Respondents reported for private and public spaces whether they had seen others smoke there in the last 6 months. Beliefs about the benefits of smoking were measured on a 7-item scale; higher scores indicated more positive beliefs. Multilevel linear regression analyses determined associations while controlling for potential confounders and stratifying by smoking status. RESULTS: Most students reported observing others smoke in public spaces, especially at train/bus stations (84%). Positive beliefs about smoking of never smokers were positively associated with seeing others smoke in train/bus stations and leisure/sports facilities, but not at home, a friend's home, restaurants or bars, when fully adjusted. Associations were of similar magnitude for ever smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking in several public places is highly visible to adolescents. Reducing this visibility might weaken positive beliefs that adolescents have about smoking.

The association between smoke-free school policies and adolescents' anti-smoking beliefs: Moderation by family smoking norms.

BACKGROUND: Smoke-free school policies (SFSPs) may influence adolescents' smoking through the development of anti-smoking beliefs. We assessed which types of anti-smoking beliefs (health, social and societal) are associated with SFSPs and whether these associations were different for adolescents in smoking permissive versus prohibitive families. METHODS: Survey data was collected in 2016-2017 from 10,980 adolescents between 14-16 years old and 315 staff in 55 schools from seven European cities. We separately measured adolescent-perceived SFSP and staff-reported SFSP at the school-level. Associations between SFSP and anti-smoking health, social and societal beliefs were studied using multi-level logistic regression, adjusting for demographics and school-level smoking prevalence. We tested for interactions between family norms and SFSP, and estimated associations for adolescents in permissive and prohibitive families, respectively. RESULTS: Adolescent-perceived SFSP was not significantly associated with anti-smoking health (OR:1.08, 95%CI:0.94-1.25), social (OR:0.89, 95%CI:0.75-1.04) and societal beliefs (OR:1.15, 95%CI:0.99-1.33). Staff-reported SFSP were associated with anti-smoking health beliefs (OR:1.12, 95%CI:1.01-1.24), but not with social (OR:0.94, 95%CI:0.83-1.07) or societal beliefs (OR:1.02, 95%CI:0.90-1.14). Most results were comparable between adolescents in smoking prohibitive and permissive families. However, in smoking prohibitive families, adolescent-perceived SFSP were associated with societal beliefs (OR:1.24, 95%CI:1.06-1.46), but not in permissive families (OR:1.06, 95%CI:0.90-1.25). Also, in smoking permissive families, staff-reported SFSP were associated with more pro-smoking social beliefs (OR:0.83, 95%CI:0.72-0.96), but not in prohibitive families (OR:1.05, 95%CI:0.92-1.16). CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence that SFSP are associated with some anti-smoking beliefs, but more so among adolescents from smoking prohibitive families than from permissive families.

Exposure to car smoking among youth in seven cities across the European Union.

BACKGROUND: In the United States and Canada, cars were found to be a major source of harmful secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among youth. Little is known about the magnitude of this public health problem in European countries. We study SHS exposure in vehicles among adolescents across seven cities of the European Union (EU), with a particular focus on socioeconomic characteristics and smoking in adolescents' social environment. METHODS: Self-reported survey data on SHS exposure in cars during the past seven days was obtained from the 2016/17 cross-sectional SILNE-R study for 14- to 17 year old adolescents in seven EU cities (N = 10,481). We applied two multivariable logistic regression models with sociodemographic characteristics and mediating smoking-related factors. RESULTS: SHS exposure in cars varied widely across the seven EU cities: 6% in Tampere (Finland), 12% in Dublin (Ireland), 15% in Amersfoort (the Netherlands), 19% in Hanover (Germany), 23% in Coimbra (Portugal), 36% in Namur (Belgium) and 43% in Latina (Italy). Low paternal (OR 1.65, CI95% 1.38-1.98) and maternal (OR 1.40, CI95% 1.16-1.68) educational levels and parental migration (OR 1.37, CI95% 1.14-1.64) backgrounds were correlated with SHS exposure in cars. Other correlates were one's own or peer smoking and environmental family factors, such as having at least one parental smoker (OR 4.04, CI95% 3.49-4.68) and partial smoking bans at home. CONCLUSIONS: In most of these seven cities, a considerable proportion of youth riding in cars, particularly those from disadvantaged and smoking-permissive backgrounds, is exposed to SHS in cars.

Understanding school staff members' enforcement of school tobacco policies to achieve tobacco-free school: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: School tobacco policies (STPs) that aim to achieve a tobacco-free environment require consistent enforcement by school staff. However, little is known about why staff choose whether or not to enforce STPs. Therefore, we investigated staff members' responses to STPs that determine enforcement. Furthermore, we examined how these responses depend on contextual factors at the individual, interpersonal, school, implementation, and national levels. METHODS: We performed a realist review (RR), which synthesizes existing primary evidence into a programme theory demonstrating key causal pathways through Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs). These CMOs link contextual factors to outcomes (i.e. staff enforcement) by explaining the underlying generative mechanisms (i.e. staff members' cognitive, psychosocial, and behavioural responses). A systematic literature search for the period 2000-2016 was performed using Academic Search Premier, PsycInfo, and MEDLINE. Forty English-language articles were identified for the synthesis. RESULTS: Our programme theory demonstrated three CMOs: when contextual factors make staff members experience STP enforcement as part of their professional role and duties, it may lead to staff members showing responsibility for STP enforcement (CMO1); when contextual factors make staff members feel their contribution is leading to positive outcomes, it may lead to staff members showing motivation to enforce STPs (CMO2), and when contextual factors make staff members feel that they are able to deal with students' responses, it may lead to staff members showing confidence in STP enforcement (CMO3). Moreover, the programme theory provided more precise insights into what contextual factors contribute to triggering the individual mechanisms and the consequent outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: By applying a realist approach, we have been able to detect three CMOs explaining staff members' STP enforcement. The findings provide useful insights explaining how stakeholders can support staff members' STP enforcement and consequently improve the impact of STPs on adolescent smoking.

Adolescent Smoking in Secondary Schools that Have Implemented Smoke-Free Policies: In-Depth Exploration of Shared Smoking Patterns.

Large numbers of adolescents smoke during school hours, despite the implementation of smoke-free school policies (SFSPs). Studies about SFSPs predominantly analyse smoking as individual behaviour, yet there is increasing recognition that smoking should be understood as social behaviour. We explored shared smoking patterns specifying where, when, and with whom, and social meanings about why groups of adolescents smoke in two Dutch schools that have implemented SFSPs. Surveys among adolescents were held to obtain contextual information about the schools. Four focus group discussions and fourteen individual interviews were held with adolescents to identify shared smoking patterns in each school. Two shared patterns were identified at a school where 17% of students smoked daily: Dependent smoking and Rebellious smoking. Both built on pro-smoking norms and underscored the benefits of smoking. Three shared patterns were identified at a school where 3% of students smoked daily: Social bonding smoking, Low-profile smoking and Smoking-friendly event smoking. These built on anti-smoking norms and helped smokers cope with negative social judgements related to smoking. We conclude that adolescent smoking during school hours is embedded in diverse shared smoking patterns. Future studies should develop more understanding about how to deal with adolescents' shared smoking patterns that decrease the effectiveness of tobacco policies.

Explaining Mechanisms That Influence Smoke-Free Implementation at the Local Level: A Realist Review of Smoking Bans.

INTRODUCTION: While studies have been undertaken to understand the adoption of outdoor and indoor smoking bans, not much is known about why implementation of smoke-free (SF) environments differs at local levels. As most European countries remain at the level of indoor bans, we aim to translate existing evidence into practical recommendations on how to improve SF (outdoor) implementation within European municipalities. METHODS: We applied six methodological steps of a realist review consistent with the RAMESES publication standards for realist syntheses. Literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science. In total, 3829 references were screened, of which 43 were synthesized. Studies dating from 2004 to 2015 with rigor evidence of SF implementation at the local level were selected. Implementation outcomes were SF enforcement, monitoring, nonsmoking compliance, and public support in cities. RESULTS: The explanatory realist framework links four innovation stages with three context-mechanism-outcome (CMO)configurations. We identified "triggering trust," "increasing priorities," and "limiting opposing interests" as underlying mechanisms, when (1) establishing, (2) developing, (3) contesting, and (4) implementing local smoking bans. The CMO propositions (CMOs) support practical recommendations, such as (1) providing authorities with local data when establishing and developing bans, (2) developing long-term strategies and implementing state-funded SF programs to prioritize sustained enforcement, and (3) limiting opposing interests through the use of the child protection frame. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first realist review on the implementation of SF enviroments at the local level. The process-oriented theory explains how and why CMOs determine SF development in cities and municipalities from planning until implementation. IMPLICATIONS: In 2015, only 16% of the world's population lived under the jurisdiction of comprehensive SF laws. The findings of this realist review are useful to implement WHO goals of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and specifically SF environments at more local levels and to adjust them to specific contextual circumstances. This paper unpacks three mechanisms that could be triggered by SF strategies developed at local levels and that can result in improved policy implementation. Such evidence is needed to enhance SF strategies at the level of cities and municipalities and to achieve WHO "Healthy Cities Network" objectives.

Boy Smokers' Rationalisations for Engaging in Potentially Fatal Behaviour: In-Depth Interviews in The Netherlands.

Adolescent smokers engage in cognitive rationalisation processes that lower perceptions of personal vulnerability to the health consequences of smoking. There is, however, hardly any evidence that provides in-depth insights on adolescents’ recurring rationalisations. Therefore, we explored how boy smokers deal with the knowledge that they are engaging in potentially fatal behaviour. Interviews were held with 16 boy smokers aged 16 to 17 years old. The qualitative analysis focussed on combining boys’ reasons about why they think they will not experience severe health consequences into coherent rationalisations that recurred among interviewees. Three rationalisations emerged from the analysis. First, boys trivialize the immediate consequences and think these can be compensated for and are outweighed by the benefits of smoking. Second, boys assume that smoking will only take place during adolescence and they will, therefore, recover from the damage inflicted. Third, boys believe that they have control over the amount and frequency of smoking and, thereby, can ensure that they will not experience fatal consequences. Boys’ recurring rationalisations build on their view that they are supposed to have fun and will not become typical adult smokers. Interventions should address these rationalisations in order to increase adolescents’ perceptions of personal vulnerability, and thereby contribute to decreasing adolescent smoking.

To what extent and why adolescents do or do not support future tobacco control measures: a multimethod study in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, the adoption of new tobacco control measures is needed to further reduce rates of adolescent smoking. Adolescents' support for future measures could increase the likelihood of adoption as this provides political leverage for tobacco control advocates. There is, however, scant evidence about to what extent and why adolescents support future measures. We therefore assessed adolescents' support for a range of future measures and explored the criteria that adolescents use to underpin their support. METHODS: A mixed-method design involved surveys and group interviews with fourth-year students (predominantly 15-16 years). The survey, completed by 345 adolescents, included statements about future tobacco control measures and a smoke-free future where nobody starts or continues smoking. Thereafter, 15 adolescents participated in five group interviews to discuss their support for future measures. RESULTS: The survey showed that adolescents generally support a smoke-free future. They expressed most support for product measures, mixed support for smoke-free areas, ambivalent support for price increases and least support for sales restrictions. The group interviews revealed that differences in support were explained by adolescents' criteria that future measures should: have the potential to be effective, not violate individuals' right to smoke, protect children from pro-smoking social influences and protect non-smokers from secondhand smoke. CONCLUSION: Adolescents' high support for a smoke-free future does not lead to categorical support for any measure. Addressing the underlying criteria may increase adolescents' support and therewith provide political leverage for the adoption of future measures.

Understanding the impact of school tobacco policies on adolescent smoking behaviour: A realist review.

BACKGROUND: Secondary schools increasingly implement school tobacco policies (STPs) to decrease adolescents' smoking. Recent studies suggested that STPs' impact depends on their implementation. We examined adolescents' cognitive and behavioural responses to STPs that impact adolescents' smoking and how these responses depend on elements of STPs' implementation. METHOD: To examine STPs and adolescent smoking, we performed a realist review, which is an explanatory approach that synthesizes existing evidence into a program theory that links elements of STPs' implementation to outcomes by specifying its underlying generative mechanisms. The search was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase between January 1991 and 2016. Thirty-seven English language articles were identified for inclusion, reporting quantitative and/or qualitative primary evidence on STPs at secondary schools, adolescent smoking behaviour, and mechanisms. From these articles, evidence was extracted about mechanisms that decrease smoking and associated countervailing-mechanisms that reduce, nullify, or revert this positive impact. RESULTS: The program theory showed that STPs may trigger four mechanisms and seven associated countervailing-mechanisms. Adolescents' smoking decreases if STPs make them feel they can get sanctioned, feel less pressure to conform to smokers, internalise anti-smoking beliefs, and find it easier to stick to the decision not to smoke. This positive impact may reduce, nullify, or revert if the implementation of STPs cause adolescents to find alternative places to smoke, develop new social meanings of smoking, want to belong in smoker groups, internalise beliefs that smoking is not bad or that it asserts personal autonomy, or alienate from schools and schools' messages. The program theory, moreover, provided insights on how elements of STPs' implementation trigger mechanisms and avoid the countervailing-mechanisms. CONCLUSION: STPs' impact can be influenced by adequate implementation and embedding them in continuous monitoring and adaptation cycles, so that schools can proactively deal with the cognitive and behavioural responses that lead to suboptimal or adverse outcomes.