Skip to main content

Table 2 Parents’ choice for most effective strategy to inform parents about passive smoking in children and how to prevent it

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

  1. a OR = Odds Ratio, 95%CI = 95% Confidence Interval
  2. #p < 0.05