Compliance with Ethical Standards All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained, and participants were informed about the study, its content, and volunarity of participation. Responses were anonymized and stored in anonymous form on a secure server. The Study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency. The study was exempt from further ethical evaluations following the rules and regulations as set forth by the Scientific Ethical Committees of Denmark.
In most industrialized societies, including Denmark where the current study was conducted, the divorce rate exceeds 40% (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016; European Commission, 2015; Statistics Denmark, 2017). Divorce has consistently been found to be among the most stressful life events and is often perceived as a prolonged stressful situation by divorcees (
Background: Two decades of divorce research has consistently documented adverse mental and physical health effects of divorce. Responding to calls for evidence-based online divorce interventions, this study tests effects of the "Cooperation after Divorce" (CAD) digital intervention platform on divorcees' mental and physical health. Methods: Randomised control trial 12-month longitudinal study using a sample of 1,856 newly divorced Danes. Mental and physical health were measured using the SF-36 at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months from baseline. Intervention effects were investigated using linear mixed effect models and Cohen's (d) for effect sizes. Results: The study found significant treatment effects of the CAD intervention on mental and physical health. These effects were evident across all eight health domains constituting the mental and physical health components. The study also found that the intervention group had significantly better mental health than the control group at subsequent 6-and 12-month assessments from baseline while for physical health, the intervention group had significantly better physical health at the 6-month assessment from baseline only. Conclusion: The results indicate that digital solutions allowing for individually tailored user experiences may hold great potential in reducing well-known adverse health effects of divorce. Practitioner's points: • The study finds highly significant treatment effects of the "CAD" digital divorce intervention on mental and physical health indicating that online interventions may be successfully integrated into help offered to divorcees post-divorce.
Objective: For many, the divorce process is associated with various degrees of hostility. Such hostility may have implications for a variety of interpersonal relationships, including relationships with the ex-partner, extended family, friends, and coworkers. The current study presents the results of a 1-year longitudinal randomized controlled trial of the “Cooperation after Divorce” (CAD) online intervention platform for adults going through a divorce. Method: Participants included 1,856 divorcees who began the intervention, on average, within 1 week of legal divorce. Participants responded to the Symptom Checklist-90–Revised Hostility subscale at baseline, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postdivorce. Results: Data analyses consisted of mixed-effects modeling and one-sample t tests. The study found that the intervention platform significantly reduced hostility among divorcees over a 1-year period, with an effect that was medium in size. Of note, there were no gender differences in the reduction in hostility over the 1-year period, suggesting that the intervention was equally beneficial to men and women. Moreover, after 1 year, in the intervention group, but not the control group, levels of hostility were reduced to normative national hostility levels. Conclusion: The results suggest that recently divorced people benefit from the online intervention platform in terms of significantly reduced hostility and suggest that the intervention platform may thereby offer long-term public health benefits given previously found associations between higher levels of hostility and health.
Aims: There are well-known gender differences in smoking, including the pattern of use and the effectiveness of smoking prevention programs. However, little is known about the differences between boys and girls in their attitudes towards smoking prevention interventions. This study explores gender differences in attitudes towards a school-based intervention to prevent smoking. Methods: We used data from the X:IT II intervention study conducted in 46 Danish elementary schools. Results: Compared to boys, girls were more positive towards smoke-free school time, both concerning rules for teachers smoking (odds ratio (OR) = 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.35–2.12) and for students smoking (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.13–1.76). No difference was observed in students signing the smoke-free agreement. However, a larger proportion of girls reported that the agreement was a good occasion to talk about smoking with their parents (OR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.13–1.76). Girls were also more positive towards the smoke-free curriculum (OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.19–1.94). Conclusions: This study showed that girls were, overall, more positive towards the components of the smoking preventive intervention. Our findings highlight the importance of considering differences in intervention preferences for boys and girls in future health prevention initiatives.
Objective To examine gender and socioeconomic differences in adolescents’ reasons for not smoking cigarettes using self-reported data from Danish 14-year-olds (N = 1,559) collected in 2018. χ2-tests were used to assess whether the proportion of students who rated 12 statements as important reasons for not smoking cigarettes differed according to gender and family occupational social class (OSC). Results More girls than boys stated that thinking the taste of cigarettes is disgusting, not being allowed to smoke by parents, knowing smoking is dangerous, not being allowed to smoke before the age of 18, not wanting to be addicted to smoking, and that smoking makes you smell bad were important reasons for choosing not to smoke cigarettes. More boys than girls reported exercising a lot and having a partner that does not smoke as important reasons for not smoking cigarettes. More students with a high OSC compared with a low OSC stated exercising a lot and that smoking makes you smell bad were important reasons. In conclusion, reasons for not smoking cigarettes differed substantially across gender and less according to socioeconomic position.
Lots of new tobacco or nicotine products are being launched, e.g., e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, which appeal especially to the youngest part of the population. For example, the use of smokeless tobacco among Danish youth rose from approx. 2% in 2010 to 9% in 2020. Hence, there is an urgent need to follow and intervene against youth tobacco or nicotine product use. This study explored the current use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco, and smokeless tobacco among Danish 15- to 29-year-olds. Further, we examined the concurrent use of two products or more. We used a nationwide survey conducted among 15- to 29-year-olds in February and March 2020. Overall, approx. 35,700 individuals received the questionnaire of which 35.5% responded (n = 13,315). One out of five (20.1%) smoked cigarettes, half of them daily, the other half occasionally. About one in twenty (3.9%) used e-cigarettes (daily or occasionally), and more than one in three (31.6%) had tried e-cigarettes. The use of heated tobacco among Danish youth is still relatively limited (0.3%). In comparison, about 9% used smokeless tobacco (daily or occasionally). Overall, 27.0% stated that they use at least one type of tobacco or nicotine product, while 5.6% used more than one product. Monitoring tobacco-related behavior in youth provides extremely important information for, e.g., policymakers and health professionals.
Aims: Smoking in youth remains a major public health issue. As increasing tobacco prices is considered one of the most effective prevention strategies, examining youth’s responsiveness to price changes on cigarettes will provide crucial knowledge. This study aims systematically to review research examining the price elasticity of demand for cigarettes among youths (<30 years of age) in high-income countries. Methods: Searches were conducted in three databases (Web of Science, Pubmed and Scopus). Inclusion criteria were publications within the past 10 years (2011–2021) written in English and with a population of youths below 30 years of age, concerning price elasticity of demand for cigarettes and from high-income countries. Searches were screened by two independent reviewers and the quality of studies was assessed using a quality assessment tool. Results: Four outcomes related to price elasticity of demand for cigarettes were examined in six studies included in this review; that is, cigarette initiation, consumption, prevalence and cessation. Overall, findings indicate that increasing tobacco prices affect youth tobacco use. The effect was associated with gender and age; young women were more price sensitive concerning smoking initiation, whereas young men were more price sensitive concerning cigarette prevalence and consumption. Moreover, younger age was associated with higher price elasticity. Conclusions: Estimates for price elasticity varied across the included studies. This may be caused by differences in data sources, collection methods used and country of origin. Most included studies were of older date. Therefore, to make reliable predictions of the expected effects of increased tobacco prices, further examinations of up-to-date and locally embedded measures are required.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.