From: Recruiting families for an intervention study to prevent second-hand smoke exposure in children
Strategy | Smoking in the presence of the child | Total (n = 1,540) | OR (95% CI)a | |
---|---|---|---|---|
YES-n = 141 (9) | NO-n = 1,399 (91) | |||
An internet program (n (%)) | 45 (32) | 131 (9) | 176 (11) | 2.0 (1.2–3.4)# |
A program via telephone contacts (n (%)) | 3 (2) | 11 (1) | 14 (1) | 1.6 (0.4–6.1) |
A program consisting of motivational interviewing with a trained coach at home (n (%)) | 25 (18) | 655 (47) | 680 (44) | 0.2 (0.1–0.4)# |
A group program for parents at a central location in a neighbourhood (n (%)) | 13 (9) | 161 (12) | 174 (11) | 0.5 (0.2–0.9)# |
A combined program consisting of contacts by phone and motivational interviewing at home (n (%)) | 29 (29) | 290 (21) | 319 (21) | 0.6 (0.3–1.0) |
Other (n (%)) - Do not know (60 (34%)) - TV documentaries and confrontational tv-advertisements (29 (16%)) - Stop active smoking (21 (12%)) - Smoking ban / take tobacco products of the market (18 (10%)) - Education about smoking at schools (12 (7%)) - Direct confrontation during e.g. doctor visits (11 (6%)) - Combination of all programs (9 (5%)) - Increase taxes and prices of tobacco products (5 (3%)) - Make SHS exposure in children punishable by law (5 (3%)) - Increase health insurance of smokers (3 (2%)) - Tailored to personal needs and intervention strategy (2 (1%)) - Free smoking-cessation programs or therapy (1 (1%)) - Nothing will help (1 (1%)) | 26 (19) | 151 (11) | 177 (12) | reference |