Smoking Prevention for Adolescents in Romanian Schools

  • Published : 2013.11.30


This study had two objectives. The first was to assess the frequency and content of school-based anti-smoking education received by Romanian adolescents aged 14-15. Secondly, the study aimed to evaluate to what extent the implementation of a specific 5 lessons smoking prevention program influences the quality of anti-smoking school education among Romanian adolescents. The investigation was performed in twenty schools from Cluj-Napoca, Romania, which were randomly assigned to the control and experimental conditions, resulting in 55 participating classes from the seventh grade (28 in the control group and 27 in the experimental group). The experimental group participated in a school-based smoking prevention program consisting of 5 lessons. The control group beneficiated only in the standard anti-smoking education offered by their schools. Six months after the program implementation, students from both experimental and control groups filled in a questionnaire, assessing several issues regarding their exposure to anti-smoking school education in the last year. The results showed a low exposure to anti-smoking school education among the Romanian adolescents. The implementation of the specific school-based smoking prevention program increased the exposure of Romanian adolescents to a higher number of lessons of smoking prevention and influenced positively the quality of these lessons. The study identified several gaps with respect to anti-smoking education in Romanian schools. It underlines the benefits of the implementation of a school based smoking prevention program with a clear structure, which contains appropriate educational messages and it is easy to implement.



  1. Cuijpers P (2002). Effective ingredients of school based drug prevention programs: a systematic review. Addict Behav, 27, 1009-23.
  2. De Vries H (2007). Comment on “Modifiable family and school environmental factors associated with smoking status among adolescents in Guangzhou, China”. Prev Med, 45, 119-20.
  3. De Vries H, Backbier E, Dijkstra M, et al (1994). A Dutch social influence smoking prevention approach for vocational school students. Health Educ Res, 9, 365-74.
  4. Dijkstra M, Mesters I, De Vries H, Van Breukelen G, Parcel GS (1999). Effectiveness of a social influence approach and boosters to smoking prevention. Health Educ Res, 14, 791-802.
  5. Koprivnikar H (2010). Efectiveness of school based smoking prevention programmes. Slov J Public Health, 49, 28-36.
  6. Lantz PM, Jacobson PD, Warner KE, et al (2000). Investing in youth tobacco control: a review of smoking prevention and control strategies. Tob Control, 9, 47-63.
  7. Lotrean LM, Dijk F, Mesters I, Ionut C, de Vries H (2010). Evaluation of a peer-led smoking prevention programme for Romanian adolescents. Health Educ Res, 25, 803-14.
  8. Mathers M, Toumbourou JW, Catalano RF, Williams J, Patton GC (2006). Consequences of youth tobacco use: a review of prospective behavioural studies. Addiction, 101, 948-58.
  9. Murray D, Perry C, Griffin G, et al (1992). Results from a statewide approach to adolescent tobacco use prevention. Prev Med, 21, 449-72.
  10. Odukoya OO, Odeyemi KA, Oyeyemi AS, Upadhyay RP (2013). Determinants of smoking initiation and susceptibility to future smoking among school-going adolescents in Lagos State, Nigeria. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 1747-53
  11. Philip PM, Parambil NA, Bhaskarapillai B, Balasubramanian S (2013). Evaluation of a specially designed tobacco control program to reduce tobacco use among school children in Kerala. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 3455-9.
  12. US Departement of Health and Human Services. (1994a). Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report: Guidelines for School Health Programs to Prevent Tobacco Use and Addiction. Washington DC: U.S Government Printing Office.
  13. US Department of Health and Human Services. (1994b). Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: USDHHS.
  14. US Department of Health and Human Services. (2000) Reducing Tobacco Use: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA.:USDHHS.
  15. Wenter D, Blackwell S, Davis K, Farrelly M (2002). First look report: Using multiple strategies in tobacco use prevention education. American Legacy Foundation.

Cited by

  1. Effects of Perceived Smoking-Cancer Relationship and Cardiovascular Health Attitudes on Childrens' Views of Smoking vol.16, pp.7, 2015,
  2. Prevalence and Determinants of Current Smoking and Intention to Smoke among Secondary School Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey among Han and Tujia Nationalities in China vol.14, pp.11, 2017,