Prevalence and correlates of environmental tobacco smoke exposure among adolescents in Mangolia
- 94 Downloads
To estimate the prevalence and identify correlates of environmental tobacco exposure (ETS) among adolescents in Mongolia.
A cross-sectional study was carried out in 2003 in Mongolia within the framework of the Global Youth Tobacco Survey. Information was obtained on exposure to Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) in the home and outside home, parental and peer smoking. Demographic characteristics such as age and sex were also obtained. Data were analyzed to obtain frequencies of characteristics. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess the association between ETS and relevant predictor variables.
73.9% (71.6%–76.1%) males and 71.7% (69.7%–73.7%) females reported being exposed to ETS either in the home or elsewhere. The odds of exposure were 5.85 (3.83–8.92) if both parents were smokers, 3.65(3.10–4.30) if only father smoked and 6.54 (3.48–12.32) if only mother smoked. Older adolescents were more likely to be exposed to ETS than younger adolescents. Prevalence of exposure to ETS within the home was similar between males and females but males had a higher prevalence of exposure outside of the home than females (50.7% and 42.4% respectively (p <0.001). Overall proportion of adolescents exposed to ETS in the home was higher than those exposed outside suggesting that domestic exposure was the main form of ETS among adolescents in Mongolia.
Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke is high among school going adolescents in Mongolia. Public health interventions aimed to reduce morbidity from tobacco among adolescents should also accord particular attention toward environmental tobacco smoke.
Key wordsPrevalence Pediatrics Environmental tobacco smoke
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 8.Arora M, Reddy MS. Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS)-Dehli. Indian Pediatr 2005; 42: 580–581.Google Scholar
- 10.The GTSS Collaborative Group. A cross country comparison of exposure to secondhand smoke among youth. Tob Control 2006; 15: 4–19.Google Scholar