SummaryBackgroundSchools in many countries undertake programmes for smoking prevention, but systematic reviews have shown mixed evidence of their effectiveness. Most peer-led approaches have been classroom-based, and rigorous assessments are scarce. We assessed the effectiveness of a peer-led intervention that aimed to prevent smoking uptake in secondary schools.MethodsWe undertook a cluster randomised controlled trial of 10 730 students aged 12–13 years in 59 schools in England and Wales. 29 schools (5372 students) were randomly assigned by stratified block randomisation to the control group to continue their usual smoking education and 30 (5358 students) to the intervention group. The intervention (ASSIST [A Stop Smoking In Schools Trial] programme) consisted of training influential students to act as peer supporters during informal interactions outside the classroom to encourage their peers not to smoke. Follow-up was immediately after the intervention and at 1 and 2 years. Primary outcomes were smoking in the past week in both the school year group and in a group at high risk of regular smoking uptake, which was identified at baseline as occasional, experimental, or ex-smokers. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN55572965.FindingsThe odds ratio of being a smoker in intervention compared with control schools was 0·75 (95% CI 0·55–1·01) immediately after the intervention (n=9349 students), 0·77 (0·59–0·99) at 1-year follow-up (n=9147), and 0·85 (0·72–1·01) at 2-year follow-up (n=8756). The corresponding odds ratios for the high-risk group were 0·79 (0·55–1·13 [n=3561]), 0·75 (0·56–0·99 [n=3483]), and 0·85 (0·70–1·02 [n=3294]), respectively. In a three-tier multilevel model with data from all three follow-ups, the odds of being a smoker in intervention compared with control schools was 0·78 (0·64–0·96).InterpretationThe results suggest that, if implemented on a population basis, the ASSIST intervention could lead to a reduction in adolescent smoking prevalence of public-health importance.FundingMRC (UK).

The objective of the study was to develop and evaluate an effective whole-community approach to identifying a diverse group of influential young people to effectively diffuse health promotion messages among their peers. A peer nomination questionnaire, developed through extensive piloting work, was completed by 10 730 Year 8 students (aged 12-13 years) in 59 schools (30 intervention, 29 control) as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Influential students identified in 30 intervention schools were trained to disseminate smoke-free health promotion messages through informal contacts with peers. This approach successfully identified, recruited and retained a diverse group of students, broadly representative of their year group, to undertake the role of 'peer supporter'. Although students and staff expressed doubts about the suitability of some young people recruited as peer supporters, the intervention achieved a 22% reduction in the odds of being a regular smoker in intervention compared with control schools [odds ratio 0.78 (95% CI 0.64-0.96)]. Carefully designed and developed peer-led interventions have potential for delivering effective smoking prevention among adolescents. Paying close attention to the way in which peer educators are identified, and involving young people themselves in this process, may be the key to increasing the effectiveness of peer education.

This article aims to clarify the meaning of the much-used term 'empowerment' in order to contribute to a more theoretically coherent development of policy and practice aimed at facilitating the empowerment of health and social care service users. The liberational and consumerist models of empowerment are highlighted, with the former having a broader emphasis on people's roles within society than the latter. The concept of 'empowerment as professional practice' is also critically explored, with the conclusion that professionals can work with people in empowering ways if they recognise and work to address the structural causes of oppression.

Introduction:School-based smoking prevention programmes can be effective, but evidence on cost-effectiveness is lacking. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of a school-based “peer-led” intervention.Methods:We evaluated the ASSIST (A Stop Smoking In Schools Trial) programme in a cluster randomized controlled trial. The ASSIST programme trained students to act as peer supporters during informal interactions to encourage their peers not to smoke. Fifty-nine secondary schools in England and Wales were randomized to receive the ASSIST programme or usual smoking education. Ten thousand seven hundred and thirty students aged 12–13 years attended participating schools. Previous work has demonstrated that the ASSIST programme achieved a 2.1% (95% CI = 0%–4.2%) reduction in smoking prevalence. We evaluated the public sector cost, prevalence of weekly smoking, and cost per additional student not smoking at 24 months.Results:The ASSIST programme cost of £32 (95% CI = £29.70–£33.80) per student. The incremental cost per student not smoking at 2 years was £1,500 (95% CI = £669–£9,947). Students in intervention schools were less likely to believe that they would be a smoker at age 16 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.66–0.96).Conclusions:A peer-led intervention reduced smoking among adolescents at a modest cost. The intervention is cost-effective under realistic assumptions regarding the extent to which reductions in adolescent smoking lead to lower smoking prevalence and/or earlier smoking cessation in adulthood. The annual cost of extending the intervention to Year 8 students in all U.K. schools would be in the region of £38 million and could result in 20,400 fewer adolescent smokers.

Background: To date, no school-based intervention has been proven to be effective in preventing adolescent smoking, despite continuing concern about smoking levels amongst young people in the United Kingdom. Although formal teacher-led smoking prevention interventions are considered unlikely to be effective, peer-led approaches to reducing smoking have been proposed as potentially valuable.