ObjectiveThe objective of this narrative review is to highlight the determinants of the epidemic rise in waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS) among youth globally. The Ecological Model of Health Promotion (EMHP) was the guiding framework for the review.Data sourcesThe following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and CINAHL Plus with Full Text. Search terms included waterpipe and its many variant terms.Study selectionArticles were included if they were published between 1990 and 2014, were in English, were available in full text and included the age group 10–29 years.Data extractionArticles which analysed determinants of WTS at any of the levels of the EMHP were retained regardless of methodological rigour: 131 articles are included. Articles were coded in a standard template that abstracted methods as well as results.Data synthesisThe review found that methodologies used to assess determinants of WTS among youth were often conventional and lacked rigor: 3/4 of the studies were cross-sectional surveys and most enrolled non-representative samples. Within the framework, the review identified determinants of WTS at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, organisational, community and policy levels.ConclusionsThe review suggests potential interventions to control WTS among youth, with emphasis on creative utilisation of social media, and tobacco control policies that include the specificities of WTS. The review further suggests the need for rigorous qualitative work to better contextualise determinants, and prospective observational and experimental studies that track and manipulate them to assess their viability as intervention targets.

The results of the present study add to the general international literature on the impact of pictorial warnings on youth and young adults. This study is also the first to test a non-health pictorial warning about the negative economic consequences of smoking, and to find that such a warning was effective among specific sociodemographic groups.

No abstract

Public health interventions are complex in nature and composed of multiple components. Evaluation of process and impact is necessary to build evidence of effectiveness. Process evaluation involves monitoring extent of implementation and comparison against the program plan. This article describes the process evaluation of the 'Qaderoon' (We are Capable) intervention; a community-based mental health promotion intervention for children living in a Palestinian refugee camp of Beirut, Lebanon. The manuscript describes the context of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, the intervention, the process evaluation plan and results. The process evaluation was guided by the literature and by a Community Youth Committee. Findings indicated that attendance was 54 and 38% for summer and fall sessions, respectively. Session objectives and activities were commonly achieved. Over 78.4% of activities were reported to be implemented fully as planned. Over 90% of the children indicated high satisfaction with the sessions. Contextual facilitators and challenges to implementing the intervention are discussed. The most challenging were maintaining attendance and the actual implementation of the process evaluation plan. Findings from process evaluation will strengthen interpretation of impact evaluation results.

Waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS) is spreading worldwide. Research has indicated health consequences of WTS similar to cigarettes. Prevalence of WTS is high among young people. In Lebanon, current use rates of 35% have been documented among 13–15 year olds. We evaluated a school-based intervention. Method: We conducted a randomized-controlled-trial of a theory-informed WTS intervention. The intervention consisted of ten sessions based on social cognitive theory and the social influences approach. Thirty-one schools participated: 14 intervention and 17 control; a total of 1279 students completed pre and post assessments. We measured knowledge, attitudes and self-reported behaviors related to WTS using Chi-square tests and regression analyses to compare results between the two study arms. Results: The intervention increased knowledge of intervention group compared to control group participants—about WTS constituents and health consequences; and shifted attitudes of intervention group participants to be even more unfavorable towards WTS. We found no impact of the intervention on WTS behaviors. Discussion: The effectiveness of the intervention on knowledge and attitudes supports previous research. The lack of intervention effect on behavior is not surprising given the timing of the post assessment immediately after the intervention, and the social context that was supportive of waterpipe use.