Differences in students' smoking-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among public, factory, and private secondary schools in Guangzhou, China.
The prevalence of smoking among adolescents in China has increased dramatically in recent years. The latest National Survey on Risk Factors of Health Behaviors indicated that the overall smoking prevalence declined slightly from 1996 to 2002, while the smoking prevalence of males aged 15-19 and females aged 15-24 in 2002 were higher than that of their counterparts in 1996. (1,2) How to delay or reverse the increasing tendency of adolescent smoking is a major challenge for public health. Accordingly, all kinds of adolescent smoking prevention programs have been carried out nationwide and many of them choose schools as the intervention settings. These school-based programs cannot achieve full success until they are carefully designed to fit the target schools' characteristics, one of which is the school type.
According to financial sources, the secondary schools in China can be mainly classified into 3 types: public, factory, and private schools. Similar to public schools in western countries, Chinese public schools are managed by governments and funded mostly from taxes. With strong financial and policy support from local governments, public schools have had good prestige in teaching quality and health care for a long time. But almost all of the public schools have strict residency-based enrollment policy, which means that children must go to the assigned local public schools according to their permanent residency.
The factory schools have their own special history with the development of China. (3) At the beginning of the establishment of the Peoples' Republic of China, many new heavy industrial factories (eg, steel, oil, mine, power) needed to be built in this new country. These factories often were located in the countryside, mountainous regions, or even in deserts far from cities. Numerous factory workers and their families moved into these areas. The number of local public schools around these big factories was too limited (or nonexistent) to accept all of the workers' children. Therefore, most of these factories were empowered to set up their own schools with encouragement from the government. All of these schools were funded and managed by the factories themselves. They usually only enrolled children whose parent(s) (1 or both) were factory workers. These factory school always owned better teachers and facilities than local public schools. Unfortunately, more and more factory schools are going to be closed down or recombined into local public schools with current reformation of Chinese state-owned factories. (4,5)
Comparatively, Chinese private schools have a shorter history. They were founded in the 1980s with the reformation of a market economic system in China. Currently, there are 2 main kinds: high-paid and general-paid private schools. The high-paid private schools are characterized by excellent physical condition and full accommodation. They are usually attended by children whose parents are company owners or businessmen with high salaries but little time to take care of their children. On the contrary, the general-paid private schools with tuition fees that are similar to public schools are mainly open to those children who are not born locally. Most of their parents are poor farmers migrating from the countryside to the cities to find new jobs. Being away from their birthplaces, these children face many barriers to enter the public schools in new places. (6) As a result, only a few immigrant farmers' children have opportunities to be enrolled in the public schools. Alternatively, most of them have to go to general-paid private schools owed by individuals or social organizations. Solely depending on students' tuitions, these general-paid private schools cannot afford experienced teachers and quality facilities. Regularly with small size and poor environment, some of them are even illegal in some places. Despite these problems, with the fast speed of urbanization in China, general-paid private schools have seen a rapid rise in number during recent years and have been playing a more and more important role in the Chinese education system. (7)
Due to their history, as noted above, there are large differences among the 3 types of schools in their critical characteristics including financial support, student source, physical environment, organizational structure, and school culture. These differences may have effects on students' smoking-related knowledge (K), attitudes (A), and behaviors (B). Rare smoking studies focusing on this issue can be found either in Chinese or in English literature. To identify factors associated with smoking-related KAB, we conducted a cross-sectional tobacco survey at 6 secondary schools and examined the role of individual, family, and school factors.
This cross-sectional study was conducted in Guangzhou, a central city of the Pearl River Delta, which is the leading commercial region in southern China. The method of stepwise sampling was applied to obtain study subjects. Step 1, Huangpu District was selected randomly among 4 districts (Huangpu, Baiyuan, Haizhu, and Fangcun) that contained all 3 kinds of schools. Step 2, according to their financial sources, 18 secondary schools in Huangpu District were classified into 3 strata, including 10 public, 3 factory, and 5 general-paid private ones. Then, 3 public, 1 factory, and 2 general-paid private schools were randomly sampled as the target schools. All of the 6 schools agreed to participate in the survey. Step 3, all the seventh, eighth, and ninth grade students and their parents in the 6 schools were sampled in this survey. The expected sample included 4138 pairs of subjects (students-parents). A consent statement was provided with each questionnaire for every subject. Those who submitted their consent and questionnaire simultaneously were considered as agreeing to participate in this survey. Finally, 3957 (95.6%) students agreed to participate and 2870 (72.5%) parents of these students completed the survey. Among the students, 2691 (68.0%) of them came from 3 public schools, 790 (20.0%) from 2 private schools, and 476 (12.0%) from a factory school.
A self-administered questionnaire on smoking-related issues was developed by a research team based on reviewing previous publications both in Chinese and in International journals. (8-11) The final questionnaire consisted of 5 parts: demographic characteristics, environment related to smoking, knowledge related to smoking and health, attitudes toward smoking and health, and cigarette smoking behaviors.
Five variables were developed to address the smoking-related school environment as perceived by students. They included "Do your peers smoke?" "Does your supervising teacher smoke?" "Have you ever seen someone smoking in your school?" "Have you ever seen the signs of no smoking in your school?" and "Can you feel the antitobacco atmosphere in your school?"
To measure the students' smoking-related knowledge, 20 items were used in the student questionnaire (Table 1). If a respondent's answer to 1 item was right, he could get 1 point. A wrong or unknown answer equaled to 0 point. The total knowledge score was the summary points of all items, with a maximum of 20 points.
A 16-item standardized scale was applied to measure the students' attitudes toward smoking and health (Table 1). The options to each item were designed as 5 ranks of a Likert-type scale. A quantitative method was used to summarize the participants' responses to all of the attitude items. For every positive attitude item, the response of "extremely agree" was scored as 5 points, "agree" as 4 points, "unclear" as 3 points, "disagree" as 2 points, and "extremely disagree" as 1 point. For every negative attitude item, the score rank above was reversed as 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 points. All the items' scores were summed as the total score of the attitude scale and the maximum score was 80 points. A higher score means holding attitudes more against smoking. The reliability of the attitude scale was tested in the pilot survey (n = 125, Cronbach' [alpha] = .82, test-retest, r = .67). (12)
The measurement of smoking behaviors in this study was referred to WHO Guidelines for the Conduct of Tobacco Smoking Surveys of the General Population. (13) The status of adolescents' smoking was defined as follows: (1) daily smoking: smoking at least 1 cigarette per day and having smoked for 3 months or more continuously/ accumulatively, (2) weekly smoking: smoking at least 1 cigarette per week and having smoked for 3 months or more continuously/accumulatively, (3) lifetime smoking: having ever smoked at least 1 cigarette, (4) nonsmoking: having not yet smoked until now, even 1 cigarette.
The student participants were asked to fill out questionnaires in the classroom during class time. The whole process of the survey was under the supervision of experienced investigators who were trained medical graduate students. The questionnaires for parents were taken home in envelopes by their children. Because all the questionnaires were anonymous, each pair of questionnaires (student/parent) were coded before distribution with the same 7-digit ID number to make sure that they could be matched later. If the last digit of the ID number was odd, the student's father completed the parent questionnaire; if the last digit of the ID number was even, the student's mother completed the parent questionnaire.
Valid questionnaires were included in final statistical analysis. Data were entered into computers by the software of Epi-data (3.0 version, The EpiData Association, Odense, Denmark) and analyzed by the statistical software of SPSS (11.0 version, SPSS, Inc, Chicago, Ill). A chi-square test was used for categorical data, and an analysis of variance was used for quantitative data with homogeneous variances or a Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test for quantitative data with heterogeneous variances. The statistical significance level was set at .05.
Among the students, 202i (51.1%) were males, 1850 (46.8%) were females, and 86 (2.2%) did not report their gender. Their ages ranged from 11 to 17 years (mean = 13.7 and median = 14). Among the parents, 1391 (48.5%) were fathers, 1275 (44.4%) were mothers, and 204 (7.1%) did not report their parental status. The age of the youngest parent was 30 years and that of the oldest was 58 years (mean = 40.7 and median = 40).
The distribution of the students' genders and birthplaces was significantly different among public, factory, and private schools. After being stratified by grades, the students' average age was highest in private schools, followed by those in the public schools and in the factory school (Table 2).
Students' family characteristics were based on their parents' report (Table 3). Nearly, all of the families were intact, and there was no difference in marital status among those parents in public, factory, and private schools. The distribution of parental education levels was significantly different among the 3 types of schools (P < .001). The difference between student monthly family incomes among the 3 types of schools was also statistically significant (P < .001).
Smoking-Related Family Environment
Combining students' and their parents' report, family environment was contrasted among students in factory, public, and private schools (Table 4). There were no significant differences in father's smoking, in mother's smoking, or in parents' educating children not to smoke (P > .05). However, the difference in sibling's smoking was statistically significant (P < .05). For the sibling's smoking, the highest prevalence was reported by the students in private schools (10.5%), followed by that in public schools (9.3%) and in the factory school (5.5%). In contrast, 78.7% of the parents in the factory school reported that they had taught their children smoking-related knowledge, higher than that in public schools (75.1%) and in private schools (72.6%).
Smoking-Related School Environment
According to their own reports, 64.3% of the factory school students, 54.0% of the public school students, and 48.6% of the private school students could sense the antitobacco atmosphere in their schools (Table 4).
The rate of peers' smoking was highest in private schools (17.7%), followed by public schools (15.1%) and the factory school (9.9%). Similarly, the largest percentage (12.8%) of private school students reported their supervising teachers' smoking compared with that in the factory school (10.3%) and public schools (6.6%). The signs of no smoking had been seen by 67.8% of the students in public schools, by 59.7% in the factory school, and by 53.9% in the private schools.
Smoking-Related Knowledge and Attitudes
Because of the gender disproportion, the smoking-related knowledge and attitude scores were examined for differences among the 3 types of schools and between boys or girls, respectively. For the smoking-related knowledge, the average score of boys in the factory school was the highest (10.3 [+ or -] 2.8), followed by that in public schools (9.8 [+ or -] 2.9) and in private schools (9.7 [+ or -] 2.8) (Table 5). The difference among them was statistically significant (P < .05). Similarly, significant differences (P < .05) in average knowledge score could be found among the girls in 3 types of schools: 10.5 for the factory school, 10 for public schools, and 9.6 for private schools, respectively (Table 5). Among the boys, the rank of average attitude scores was as follows: highest in the factory school (67.4 [+ or -] 11.5), lower in public schools (66.5 [+ or -] 10.4), and lowest in private schools (65.2 [+ or -] 9.5), and significant (P < .05) differences were found among them. But the average attitude scores were close among the girls in the 3 types of schools with no significant difference (P > .05).
The smoking prevalence among students was examined by 3 measurements: lifetime smoking, weekly smoking, and daily smoking. The prevalence of students' lifetime smoking in private schools (35.4%) was twice of that in public schools (17.4%) and that in the factory school (13.2%). The differences among them were statistically significant (P < .001). The prevalence of students' weekly smoking was highest in private schools (6.2%), lower in public schools (4.9%), and lowest in the factory school (4.0%). Similar rank was also found for the prevalence of daily smoking (3.9% private, 3.5% public, and 2.7% factory), but both the differences in the prevalence of weekly smoking and daily smoking were not significant (P > .05) among the 3 types of schools. Considering the gender disproportion among the 3 types of schools, the smoking rates were further stratified by gender (male and female) (Table 6).
The smoking measurement in this study, proposed by World Health Organization on 1982, is of little difference from that used in the Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS). (14) The definitions for ever smoking are the same, while the GYTS lacks related variables to evaluate the prevalence of weekly and daily smoking. In contrast, this study does not involve information about current cigarette smoking, which is defined as "smoked cigarettes on one or more days in the 30 days preceding the survey" as is done in GYTS. Therefore, it is not appropriate to compare or contrast the smoking prevalence of GYTS and this survey.
The above results support our prior hypothesis for this study. It is true that there are significant differences in student's smoking-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among factory, public, and private schools. A serious problem of tobacco use among adolescents exists in private schools, which is consistent with the results of another previous survey in China. (15) Moreover, students in the 3 types of schools have different demographic characteristics, family socioeconomic status, and smoking-related family and school environments, which may contribute to the different smoking prevalence among their students.
The students' demographic imbalance partly leads to the differences of smoking prevalence in the factory, public, and private schools. Specifically, the demographic imbalance is most obvious in private schools. For genders, there are remarkably more boys than girls (58.4% vs 41.6%) in private schools compared with the close percentages of boys and girls (half and half) in both the factory and the public schools. It is easy to understand that this disproportion of gender contributes to the high prevalence of smoking because numerous previous surveys have shown that Chinese boys are far more likely to smoke than Chinese girls. (16-18) Another important characteristic, the average age of private school students, is significantly higher than in either public or factory schools even after being stratified by grade. This indicates that many students in private schools have delayed their normal initiation age of entering secondary schools due to the migration with their parents. Because age is an important predictor of smoking among adolescents, the prevalence of smoking in private schools will increase with more students of older ages.
At the individual level, health skills also contribute to the different prevalence of smoking among the 3 types of students. According to the Procede-Proceed theory of health promotion, health knowledge and proper attitudes are the predisposed factors for people to adopt healthy behaviors or avoid risky behaviors. (19) The same ranks are found for the scores of knowledge and attitudes among boys and for the scores of knowledge among girls: highest in the factory school, lower in public schools, and lowest in private schools. This indicate that students in private schools lacking the necessary knowledge about smoking and health and their attitudes tend to be accepting smoking. They have a weaker ability to resist the temptation of cigarettes, and as a result, they find it easier to light their first cigarettes and become regular smokers in the future. (20,21)
Meanwhile, we should not ignore the family's effects on the smoking behavior of adolescents. (22,23) The parental socioeconomic status is one of the most important family factors associated with adolescent smoking. (24) In this study, the parents of children who study in the factory school are more likely to be of high socioeconomic status, which may have indirect effects on students' smoking behaviors. Evidence shows that more of those worker parents have taught their children the knowledge about smoking and health, besides educating them not to smoke in a similar frequency with other parents in private and public schools. In contrast, the family environment is partly blamed for the high prevalence of smoking among private school students. The results show that most of those students in the 2 sampled private schools (general paid) migrate from other places. Unfortunately, most of their parents are not well educated and can only get unstable, time-consuming jobs with lower incomes. It is hard for those children to receive good family education and adequate parental care. This may indirectly increase the risk for those children to begin smoking. Another risky environment is that some of their elder siblings have become current smokers, which may partly add to this risk. (25)
The school environment can provide direct clues for us to look closely into the differences of smoking prevalence among the students in the 3 types of schools. It has been reported that the school environment also has some effects on the students' smoking. (26,27) Students in the private schools seem to live in a riskier school environment, which encourages smoking. Most of them have seen someone smoking in school areas, sometimes peers, and supervising teachers smoking. They find comparatively fewer signs of not smoking in their schools. As a result, only less than half of them can sense an antitobacco atmosphere in school. In contrast, a better environment in the factory school makes more students feel that tobacco use is not allowed in their school.
The school policy and management may be another potential factor associated with the different prevalences of smoking. (27-29) Because of changeable government policies and sole financial resources (tuition), general-paid private schools have been experiencing numerous problems such as unclear direction, inadequate funds, incomplete facilities, and the interim employment system. (30) These problems have direct or indirect effects on private school owners' attitudes toward health education. Generally, health education does not get the attention it deserves in these private schools. Necessary curriculum and teachers for health education cannot be guaranteed, which creates difficulties for students to adequately learn the scientific knowledge about smoking and health.
As for the high-paid private schools, previous similar surveys in other parts of China may be helpful in learning more about them. In 2001, the University of Southern California conducted a cross-sectional study in 8 high-paid private secondary schools at Wuhai, a big city in central China. (15) The results showed that despite sufficient financial support and better physical school environments, high-paid private schools were still suffering from a high prevalence of lifetime smoking among their students compared with local public schools (male: 64.1% vs 32.5% and female: 37.9% vs 13%). We are not sure whether this phenomenon also exists in high-paid private schools in Guangzhou or other cities.
Several limitations in this study must be noted here. First, the study subjects were just sampled within Huangpu District, a county of southern China. It is appropriate to assume that the sampled population represents the secondary school students in the City of Guangzhou but is far from being a good sample at the provincial or the national level. In addition, the number of schools sampled was relatively small, which limits the strength of conclusions somewhat. Given the area and size of the sample, we must be very careful in generalizing the findings obtained in this study. Fortunately, the results were internally consistent and also similar with another study in Wuhan of central China. (15)
Second, several variables in the questionnaire are not enough to identify smoking-related school health education, policy, and management. It is necessary to address the details about health education, including the frequency, methods, effectiveness of health education, and the school financial budget for it. In addition, some other important information on smoking-related school policy and management cannot be obtained from this study, for example, the school ban of students' smoking and the extent of enforcing it, whether teachers and guest visitors are allowed to smoke in school or in the presence of students, (28) how teachers deal with student smokers, and specific services or programs for assisting student smokers to quit.
The students in general-paid private secondary schools had less smoking-related knowledge and held more supportive attitudes toward smoking than their counterparts in public and factory schools. The prevalence of student smoking was highest in general-paid private schools, which may be associated with various potential factors at individual, family, and school levels. Therefore, Chinese general-paid private schools should become one of the focus places for tobacco control among the adolescents. Given the high risk of student smoking, these schools deserve more resources (per student) allocated to tobacco control from the governments.
(1.) Yang G, Fan L, Tan J, et al. Smoking in China: findings of the 1996 National Prevalence Survey. JAMA. 1999;282:1247-1253.
(2.) Yang G, Ma J, Liu N, et al. Smoking and passive smoking in Chinese, 2002. Chin J Epidemiol. 2005;26:77-83.
(3.) Tuo M. The beginning, current situation and future development of factory schools. Hubei Educ. 1999;25:26-27.
(4.) Song L, Yang J. The background of freeing state-owned factories from the duty of launching schools in China. Chin J Metallurgy Educ. 2002;23:82-86.
(5.) Yao Y. Solutions for the problem of primary and secondary factory schools. J Sichuan Teacher College (Philosophy and Social Sciences). 1998; 19:41-44.
(6.) Li X. The superficial analysis of children's educational problem of farmers working in the city. Educ Econ. 2005; 16:27-29.
(7.) Liao L, Ma X. Explore of the reasons for the rise and development of private schools in China. Qiushou. 2003;24:108-110.
(8.) Carosella AM, Ossip-Klein DJ, Owens CA. Smoking attitudes, beliefs, and readiness to change among acute and long term care inpatients with psychiatric diagnoses. AddictBehav. 1999;24:331-344.
(9.) Liu X, Liu F. Study of the intervention on smoking among primary and secondary school students and their parents. Chin J Prey Med. 2000;34:377-378.
(10.) Wu C. Study on the smoking condition and behavior intervention of primary and middle school students. J Pre Med Inf. 1997; 13: 199-203.
(11.) Zhang L, Wang W, Zhao Q, et al. Psychosocial predictors of smoking among secondary school students in Henan, China. Health Educ Res. 2000; 15:415-422.
(12.) Wen X, Chen W, Ou Y, et al. Assessment on a scale for measuring smoking-related attitude in Chinese secondary school students. Chin J Mental Health. 2005; 19:793-795, 802.
(13.) World Health Organization. Guidelines for the conduct of tobacco smoking surveys of the general population: Report of a WHO meeting held in the general population. In: Report of a WHO meeting held in Helsinki, Finland. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 1982.
(14.) The Global Youth Tobacco Survey Collaborative Group. Tobacco use among youth: a cross country comparison. Tob Control. 2002; 11:252-270.
(15.) Zhang D, Liu C, Chen X, et al. Smoking prevalence of high school students in Wuhan private schools. Chin J School Health. 2003;24: 214-215.
(16.) Li X, Fang X, Stanton B. Cigarette smoking among schoolboys in Beijing, China. J Adolec. 1999;22:621-625.
(17.) Unger JB, Yan L, Chen X, et al. Adolescent smoking in Wuhan, China: baseline data from the Wuhan Smoking Prevention Trial. Am J Prev Med. 2001;21:162-169.
(18.) Yang G, Ma J, Chen A, et al. Smoking among adolescents in China: 1998 survey findings. Int J Epidemiol. 2004;33:1103-1110.
(19.) Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health Promotion Planning: An Education and Environment Approach. 2nd ed. Mountain View, Calif: Mayfield Publishing Company; 1991.
(20.) Tyas SL, Pederson LL. Psychosocial factors related to adolescent smoking: a critical review of the literature. Tob Control. 1998;7: 409-420.
(21.) Wen X, Chen W, Lu C, et al. Knowledge and belief related to smoking and health and their association with smoking behaviors among secondary school students. Chin J Public Health. 2005; 21:756-758.
(22.) Challier B, Chau N, Predine R, et al. Associations of family environment and individual factors with tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drug use in adolescents. Eur J Epidemiol. 2000;16: 33-42.
(23.) Swan GE, Hudmon KS, Jack LM, et al. Environmental and genetic determinants of tobacco use: methodology for a multidisciplinary, longitudinal family-based investigation. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prey. 2003; 12:994-1005.
(24.) de Vries H. Socio-economic differences in smoking: Dutch adolescents' beliefs and behavior. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:419-424.
(25.) Von Bothmer MI, Mattsson B, Fridlund B. Influences on adolescent smoking behavior: siblings' smoking and norms in the social environment do matter. Health Sac Care Community. 2002;10: 213-220.
(26.) MacDonald M, Wright NE. Cigarette smoking and the disenfranchisement of adolescent girls: a discourse of resistance? Health Care Women Int. 2002;23:281-305.
(27.) Murray M, Kiryluk S, Swan AV. School characteristics and adolescent smoking: results from the MRC/Derbyshire smoking study 1974-8 and from a follow up in 1981. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1984;38:167-172.
(28.) Griesbach D, Inchley J, Currie C. More than words? The status and impact of smoking policies in Scottish schools. Health Promot Int. 2002;17:31-41.
(29.) Thomas R. School-based programs for preventing smoking. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;4:CD001293.
(30.) Zhang Z. Shortcomings and countermeasures in the development of private schools in China. J Baoji Univ Art Sci. 1996; 18: 93-96.
XIAOZHONG WEN, MSc (a)
WEIQING CHEN, PhD (b)
ZHENGMIH QIAN, PhD (c)
JOSHUA E. MUSCAT, PhD (d)
CIYONG LU, PhD (e)
WENHUA LING, PhD (f)
(a) Research Assistant, (firstname.lastname@example.org), Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.
(b)professor of Epidemiology, Deputy Dean, (email@example.com), Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan 2nd Rd, Guangzhou 510080, China.
(c) Assistant Professor, (firstname.lastname@example.org), Health Evaluation Science, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA 17033.
(d) Associate Professor, (email@example.com), Health Evaluation Science, Penn State College of Medicine, 500 University Blvd, Hershey, PA 17033.
(e) Associate Professor, (firstname.lastname@example.org), Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou S 10080, China.
(f) Professor, Dean, (email@example.com), Department of Clinical Nutrition, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.
Address correspondence to: Weiqing Chert, Professor of Epidemiology, Deputy Dean, (firstname.lastname@example.org), Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan 2nd Rd, Guangzhou 510080, China. This is the baseline survey for the project of Evaluation on the Effectiveness of Smoking Prevention and Control among Primary and Secondary School Students, which is funded by Chinese Medicine Board in New York (CMB 00-29). The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Huangpu Education Bureau and 6 secondary schools. We also appreciate Professor Zhijin Wang, Dr Yuming Chen, and Dr Yuantao Hao for their assistance in developing the questionnaires.
Table 1. Items of Knowledge About Smoking and Health for Chinese Secondary School Students Knowledge Content Answer Diseases caused by smoking Chronic bronchitis Yes Cold No Emphysema Yes Tuberculosis No Lung cancer Yes Coronary heart disease Yes Hypertension Yes Stroke Yes Bladder cancer Yes Diabetes Yes Harmful components of tobacco Nicotine Yes Tar Yes Carbon monoxide (CO) Yes Hydrocyanic acid (HCN) Yes General smoking-related knowledge Is passive smoking Yes harmful to health? Which day is "World May 31 No Smoking Day?" Who will get worse Adolescents consequence if they smoke, adolescents or adults? Are there bans for Yes tobacco advertisements on mass media in advertisement law? Is a pregnant woman's Yes smoking bad for her baby? What is the change Decrease tendency of smoking prevalence in western countries since 1970s? Attitudes Toward Knowledge Content Smoking and Health +/- * Diseases caused by smoking Effects of tobacco Chronic bronchitis Smoking is very + harmful to health Cold Smoking can relieve - fatigue and improve study efficiency Emphysema We should try to increase - job positions by developing tobacco industry Tuberculosis The feeling of smoking after meals is just like being a happy spirit Lung cancer Smoking image Coronary heart disease A man without smoking - is not a real man Hypertension It is a fashion for young - females to smoke Stroke A brave youth should try - the feeling of smoking Bladder cancer Smoking is a symbol - of maturation and independence Diabetes Cigarette's role in social contact Harmful components of tobacco It is impolite to refuse - the cigarettes passed by others Nicotine It is easy to get close - relationship by pas- sing cigarettes each other Tar Parents should not smoke + in front of children Carbon monoxide (CO) It is uncivil to smoke + in public places Hydrocyanic acid (HCN) Tobacco control measures General smoking-related Smoking should be + knowledge forbidden in public places Is passive smoking All the tobacco adver- + harmful to health? tisements should be forbidden Which day is "World Cigarette sales to minors + No Smoking Day?" should be banned Who will get worse No one should be + consequence if they allowed to smoke in smoke, adolescents school area or adults? Are there bans for tobacco advertisements on mass media in advertisement law? Is a pregnant woman's smoking bad for her baby? What is the change tendency of smoking prevalence in western countries since 1970s? * "+" positive attitude; "-;" negative attitude. Table 2. Differences in Demographic Characteristics Among Students in Public, Factory, and Private Schools in Guangzhou, China (Reported by Students) Gender (%) Age [+ or -] SD) School Type Males Females Seventh Grade Factory (n = 476) 50.4 49.6 12.7 [+ or -] 0.5 Public (n = 2691) 50.7 49.3 12.8 [+ or -] 0.6 Private (n = 790) 58.4 41.6 13.2 [+ or -] 0.9 [chi square] 15.09 71.49 * P <.001 <.001 Age (X [+ or -] SD) School Type Eighth Grade Ninth Grade Factory (n = 476) 13.7 [+ or -] 0.5 14.8 [+ or -] 0.6 Public (n = 2691) 13.8 [+ or -] 0.6 14.9 [+ or -] 0.6 Private (n = 790) 14.2 [+ or -] 0.7 15.2 [+ or -] 0.8 [chi square] 84.63 * 18.15 * P <.001 <.001 Birthplaces (%) Out of School Type Huangpu District Other Districts Guangzhou Factory (n = 476) 78.6 9.5 11.8 Public (n = 2691) 90.4 3.3 6.3 Private (n = 790) 27.5 18.0 54.6 [chi square] 1354 P <.001 * Kruskal-Wallis test was used here because of the heterogeneous age variances. Table 3. Differences in Family Characteristics Among the Students in Public, Factory, and Private Schools in Guangzhou, China (Reported by Parents) Factory Public Private School School School Family Characteristics n % n % n % Parental marital status Married 367 96.3 1638 96.0 603 98.2 Divorced 5 1.3 29 1.7 5 0.8 Widowed 7 1.8 31 1.8 3 0.5 Separated 2 0.5 9 0.5 3 0.5 Educational level Illiteracy 3 0.8 10 0.6 11 1.7 Primary school 21 5.4 249 14.2 115 17.6 Secondary school 136 34.7 825 47.0 302 46.3 High school 155 39.5 543 30.9 190 29.1 College 77 19.6 129 7.3 34 5.2 Monthly family income (/person) in dollars Low (0-125) 88 25.5 590 43.9 196 38.0 Middle (126-300) 173 50.1 533 39.7 218 42.2 High ([greater than 84 24.3 221 16.4 102 19.8 or equal to] 301) Family Characteristics [chi square] P Parental marital status Married Divorced Widowed 8.3 .217 Separated Educational level Illiteracy Primary school Secondary school 122.4 <.001 High school College Monthly family income (/person) in dollars Low (0-125) Middle (126-300) 41.0 <.001 High ([greater than or equal to] 301) Table 4. Differences in Smoking-Related Family and School Environment Among the Students in Factory, Public, and Private Schools in Guangzhou, China Factory Public Private School School School (Ns = 476, (Ns = 2691, (Ns = 790, Np = 395) Np = 1810) Np = 665) n % n % n % Family environment Father's smoking 287 60.3 1686 62.7 466 59.0 (reported by students) Mother's smoking 4 0.8 26 1.0 11 1.4 (reported by students) Sibling's smoking 26 5.5 250 9.3 83 10.5 (reported by students) Educate children not to 335 84.8 1541 85.1 583 87.7 smoke (reported by parents) Teach children smoking- 311 78.7 1359 75.1 483 72.6 related knowledge (reported by parents) School environment (all reported by students) Peers' smoking 47 9.9 406 15.1 140 17.7 Supervising teacher's 49 10.3 178 6.6 101 12.8 smoking Someone smoking in 325 68.3 2255 83.8 652 82.5 school area Signs of no smoking 284 59.7 1825 67.8 426 53.9 in school Feel the antitobacco 306 64.3 1453 54.0 384 48.6 atmosphere [chi square] P Family environment Father's smoking 3.89 .14 (reported by students) Mother's smoking 1.28 .53 (reported by students) Sibling's smoking 9.64 .008 (reported by students) Educate children not to 2.82 .24 smoke (reported by parents) Teach children smoking- 4.94 .085 related knowledge (reported by parents) School environment (all reported by students) Peers' smoking 14.4 .001 Supervising teacher's 33.4 <.001 smoking Someone smoking in 65.6 <.001 school area Signs of no smoking 55.8 <.001 in school Feel the antitobacco 29.5 <.001 atmosphere Ns, number of students; Np, number of parents. Table 5. Differences in Students' Smoking-Related Knowledge and Attitudes Among Chinese Factory, Public, and Private Schools in Guangzhou, China Score of Smoking- Related Knowledge Boys Girls School Type (X [+ or -] SD) (X [+ or -] SD) Factory (n = 476) 10.3 [+ or -] 2.8 10.5 [+ or -] 2.5 Public (n=2691) 9.8 [+ or -] 2.9 10.0 [+ or -] 2.6 Private (n = 790) 9.7 [+ or -] 2.8 9.6 [+ or -] 2.7 F/[chi square] 4.50 9.92 P .011 <.001 Score of Attitudes Toward Smoking Boys Girls School Type (X [+ or -] SD) (X [+ or -] SD) Factory (n = 476) 67.4 [+ or -] 11.5 69.5 [+ or -] 9.2 Public (n=2691) 66.5 [+ or -] 10.4 70.4 [+ or -] 7.8 Private (n = 790) 65.2 [+ or -] 9.5 69.7 [+ or -] 7.5 F/[chi square] 17.0 * 3.91 * P <.001 .141 * Kruskal-Wallis test was used here because of the heterogeneous attitude score variances. Table 6. Differences in Prevalence of Smoking Among Public, Factory, and Private School Students in Guangzhou, China (%) Male Lifetime Weekly Daily School Type Number Smokers Smokers Smokers Factory 237 16.5 5.5 3.8 Public 1330 26.5 8.3 6.4 Private 454 49.6 9.9 6.4 [chi square] 110 3.98 2.46 P <.001 .136 .292 Female Lifetime Weekly School Type Number Smokers Smokers Factory 233 9.9 2.6 Public 1294 7.2 0.8 Private 323 15.2 1.2 [chi square] 20.6 6.09 P <.001 .048 Total * Lifetime Weekly Daily School Type Number Smokers Smokers Smokers Factory 476 13.2 4.0 2.7 Public 2691 17.4 4.9 3.5 Private 790 35.4 6.2 3.9 [chi square] 139.63 3.42 1.26 P <.001 .18 .53 * 86 students did not report their gender.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Research Article|
|Author:||Wen, Xiaozhong; Chen, Weiqing; Qian, Zhengmih; Muscat, Joshua E.; Lu, Ciyong; Ling, Wenhua|
|Publication:||Journal of School Health|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2008|
|Previous Article:||Cognitive and temperament clusters in 3- to 5-year-old children with aggressive behavior.|
|Next Article:||MasterMind: Empower Yourself With Mental Health. A program for adolescents.|