Annals of Behavioral Medicine

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 231–243 | Cite as

Comparison of Two School-Based Smoking Prevention Programs among South African High School Students: Results of a Randomized Trial

  • Ken Resnicow
  • Sasiragha Priscilla Reddy
  • Shamagonam James
  • Riyadh Gabebodeen Omardien
  • Nilen Sunder Kambaran
  • Heinrich George Langner
  • Roger D. Vaughan
  • Donna Cross
  • Greg Hamilton
  • Tracy Nichols
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Smoking rates are projected to increase substantially in developing countries such as South Africa.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of two contrasting approaches to school-based smoking prevention in South African youth compared to the standard health education program. One experimental program was based on a skills training/peer resistance model and the other on a harm minimization model.

Method

Thirty-six public schools from two South African provinces, KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape, were stratified by socioeconomic status and randomized to one of three groups. Group 1 (comparison) schools (n = 12) received usual tobacco use education. Group 2 schools (n = 12) received a harm minimization curriculum in grades 8 and 9. Group 3 schools (n = 12) received a life skills training curriculum in grades 8 and 9. The primary outcome was past month use of cigarettes based on a self-reported questionnaire.

Result

Five thousand two hundred sixty-six students completed the baseline survey. Of these, 4,684 (89%) completed at least one follow-up assessment. The net change in 30-day smoking from baseline to 2-year follow-up in the control group was 6% compared to 3% in both harm minimization (HM) and life skills training (LST) schools. These differences were not statistically significant. Intervention response was significantly moderated by both gender and race. The HM intervention was more effective for males, whereas the life skills intervention was more effective for females. For black African students, the strongest effect was evident for the HM intervention, whereas the strongest intervention effect for “colored” students was evident for the LST group.

Conclusion

The two experimental curricula both produced similar overall reductions in smoking prevalence that were not significantly different from each other or the control group. However, the impact differed by gender and race, suggesting a need to tailor tobacco and drug use prevention programs. More intensive intervention, in the classroom and beyond, may be needed to further impact smoking behavior.

Keywords

Smoking prevention South Africa Schools 

Notes

Acknowledgement

Sole funding for the project was provided by an NIH Fogarty International Center Grant TW005977 to the first author.

References

  1. 1.
    Centers for Disease Control and P. Cigarette use among high school students—United States, 1991–2005. MMWR–Morb Mort Wkly Rep. 2006; 55: 724–726.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    White V, Hill D, Siahpush M, Bobevski I. How has the prevalence of cigarette smoking changed among Australian adults? Trends in smoking prevalence between 1980 and 2001. Tob Control. 2003; 12(Suppl 2): ii67–ii74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hill D, White V, Effendi Y. Changes in the use of tobacco among Australian secondary students: Results of the 1999 prevalence study and comparisons with earlier years. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2002; 26: 156–163.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Health Canada. Youth smoking in Canada. CTUMS (Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey), February–December 2000. 2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2002: Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2002.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lando HA, Borrelli B, Klein LC, et al. The landscape in global tobacco control research: A guide to gaining a foothold. Am J Public Health. 2005; 95: 939–945.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Warren CW, Riley L, Asma S, et al. Tobacco use by youth: A surveillance report from the Global Youth Tobacco Survey project. Bull WHO. 2000; 78: 868–876.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Swart D, Reddy P, Ruiter RA, de Vries H. Cigarette use among male and female grade 8–10 students of different ethnicity in South African schools. Tob Control. 2003; 12: E1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reddy P, Resnicow K, Omardien R, Kambaran N. Prevalence and correlates of substance use among high school students in South Africa and the United States. Am J Public Health. 2007; 97: 1859–1864.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for school health programs to prevent tobacco use and addiction. J Sch Health. 1994; 64: 353–360.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Glynn TJ. School based smoking prevention trials at the U.S. National Cancer Institute: Results and recommendations. Tobacco and Health 1990 The Global War. Perth, WA; 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Glynn TJ, Anderson DM, Schwarz L. Tobacco-use reduction among high-risk youth: Recommendations of a National Cancer Institute expert advisory panel. Prev Med. 1991; 20: 279–291.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing Tobacco Use: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Georgia: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Vries H, Candel M, Engels R, Mercken L. Challenges to the peer influence paradigm: Results for 12–13 year olds from six European countries from the European Smoking Prevention Framework Approach study. Tob Control. 2006; 15: 83–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Steptoe A, Wardle J, Cui W, et al. An international comparison of tobacco smoking, beliefs and risk awareness in university students from 23 countries. Addiction. 2002; 97: 1561–1571.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sly DF, Heald GR, Ray S. The Florida “truth” anti-tobacco media evaluation: Design, first year results, and implications for planning future state media evaluations. Tob Control. 2001; 10: 9–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Farrelly MC, Davis KC, Haviland ML, Messeri P, Healton CG. Evidence of a dose–response relationship between “truth” antismoking ads and youth smoking prevalence. Am J Public Health. 2005; 95: 425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Botvin G, Eng A. The efficacy of a multicomponent approach to the prevention of cigarette smoking. Prev Med. 1982; 11: 199–211.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Botvin G, Baker E, Renick N, Filazzola A, Botvin E. A cognitive–behavioral approach to substance abuse prevention. Addict Behav. 1984; 9: 137–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Botvin G, Dusenbury L, Baker E, James-Ortiz S, Kerner J. A skills training approach to smoking prevention among Hispanic youth. J Behav Med. 1989; 12: 279–295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Botvin GJ, Baker E, Dunsenbury L, Tortu S, Botvin E. Preventing adolescent drug abuse through a multimodal congintive–behavioral approach: Results of a three year study. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1990; 58: 437–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Botvin G, Baker E, Dusenbury L, Botvin E, Diaz T. Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug use prevention trial in a white middle-class population. JAMA. 1995; 273: 1106–1112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Botvin G, Epstein J, Schinke S, Diaz T. Predictors of cigarette smoking among inner-city minority youth. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 1994; 15: 67–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Botvin G, Dusenbury L. Smoking prevention among urban minority youth: Assessing effects on outcome and mediating variables. Health Psychol. 1992; 11: 290–299.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Botvin GJ, Schinke SP, Epstein JA, Diaz T, Botvin EM. Effectiveness of culturally focused and generic skills training approaches to alcohol and drug abuse prevention among minority adolescents: Two-year follow-up results. Psychol Addict Behav. 1995; 9: 183–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Botvin GJ, Schinke SP, Epstein JA, Diaz T. Effectiveness of culturally focused and generic skills training approaches to alcohol and drug abuse prevention among minority youths. Psychol Addict Behav. 1994; 8: 116–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Botvin GJ, Griffin KW, Diaz T, Miller N, Ifill-Williams M. Smoking initiation and escalation in early adolescent girls: One-year follow-up of a school-based prevention intervention for minority youth. J Am Med Women’s Assoc. 1999; 54: 139–143. 152.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Botvin GJ, Griffin KW, Diaz T, et al. Preventing illicit drug use in adolescents: Long-term follow-up data from a randomized control trial of a school population. Addict Behav. 2000; 25: 769–774.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Botvin GJ. Preventing drug abuse in schools: Social and competence enhancement approaches targeting individual-level etiologic factors. Addict Behav. 2000; 25: 887–897.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Resnicow K, Botvin G. On the effects of school health education programs: Why do they decay? Prev Med. 1993; 22: 484–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wiehe SE, Garrison MM, Christakis DA, Ebel BE, Rivara FP. A systematic review of school-based smoking prevention trials with long-term follow-up. J Adolesc Health. 2005; 36: 162–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Skara S, Sussman S. A review of 25 long-term adolescent tobacco and other drug use prevention program evaluations. Prev Med. 2003; 37: 451–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Spoth R, Randalla G, Trudeaua L, Shina C, Redmond C. Substance use outcomes 51/2 years past baseline for partnership-based, family-school preventive interventions. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008; 96: 57–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Flay B. The Long-term promise of effective school-based smoking prevention programs: Appendix D. In: Bonnie R, Stratton K, Wallace R, eds. Ending the Tobacco Problem: A Blueprint for the Nation. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine; 2007: 449–477.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Seal N. Preventing tobacco and drug use among Thai high school students through life skills training. Nursing and Health Sciences. 2006; 8: 164–168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Peterson AV Jr., Kealey KA, Mann SL, Marek PM, Sarason IG. Hutchinson smoking prevention project: Long-term randomized trial in school-based tobacco use prevention—results on smoking. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 1979–1991.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thomas R. School-based programmes for preventing smoking [update in Cochrane Database Syst Rev.;3:CD001293; PMID: 16855966]. 2006:CD001293, 002002.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bell R, Ellickson P, Harrison E. Do drug prevention effects persist into high school? How project alert did with ninth graders. Prev Med. 1993; 22: 463–483.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Perry C, Kelder S, Murray D, Klepp K. Communitywide smoking prevention: Long-term outcomes of the Minnesota Heart Health Program of the Class of 1989 study. Am J Public Health. 1992; 82: 1210–1216.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Elder J, Wildey M, de Moor C, et al. The long-term prevention of tobacco use among junior high school students: Classroom and telephone interventions. Am J Public Health. 1993; 83: 1239–1244.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wiehe SE, Garrison MM, Christakis DA, Ebel BE, Rivara FP. A systematic review of school-based smoking prevention trials with long-term follow-up. J Adolesc Health. 2005; 36(3): 162–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hansen W, Graham J. Preventing alcohol, marijuana, and cigarette use among adolescents: Peer pressure resistance training versus establishing conservative norms. Prev Med. 1991; 20: 414–430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Donaldson S, Graham J, Piccinin A, Hansen W. Resistance-skills training and onset of alcohol use: Evidence for beneficial and potentially harmful effects in public schools and in private Catholic schools. Health Psychol. 1995; 14: 291–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sussman S, Dent C, Stacy A, et al. Project towards no tobacco use, 1-year behavior outcomes. Am J Public Health. 1993; 83: 1245–1250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Donaldson SI, Graham JW, Hansen WB. Testing the generalizability of intervening mechanism theories: Understanding the effects of adolescent drug use prevention interventions. J Behav Med. 1994; 17: 195–216.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Donaldson SI, Sussman S, MacKinnon DP, et al. Drug abuse prevention programming: Do we know what content works? Am Behav Sci. 1996; 39: 868–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Palinkas LA, Atkins CJ, Miller C, Ferreira D. Social skills training for drug prevention in high-risk female adolescents. Prev Med. 1996; 25: 692–701.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Elder J, Sallis J, Woodruff S, Wildey M. Tobacco-refusal skills and tobacco use among high risk adolescents. J Behav Med. 1993; 16: 629–642.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Resnicow K, Smith M, Harrison L, Drucker E. Correlates of occasional tobacco and marijuana use: Are teens harm reducing? Addict Behav. 1999; 24: 251–266.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hamilton G, Cross D, Resnicow K. Occasional cigarette smokers: Cue for harm reduction smoking education. Addict Res. 2000; 8: 419–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Des Jarlais D, Friedman S, Ward T. Harm reduction: A public health response to the AIDS epidemic among injecting drug users. Annu Rev Public Health. 1993; 14: 413–450.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Drucker E. Harm reduction: A public health strategy. Curr Issues Public Health. 1995; 1: 64–70.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Duncan DF, Nicholson T, Clifford P, Hawkins W, Petosa R. Harm reduction: An emerging new paradigm for drug education. J Drug Educ. 1994; 24: 281–290.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Resnicow K, Drucker E. Reducing the harm of a failed drug control policy. Am Psychol. 1999; 54: 842–843.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Borland R, Scollo M. Opportunities for harm minimisation in tobacco control. Drug Alochol Rev. 1999; 18: 345–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    West R. Smoking: Its influence on survival and cause of death. Journal of Royal College of Physicians of London. 1992; 26: 357–36654.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Zang E, Wynder E. Cumulative tar exposure. A new index for estimating lung cancer risk among cigarette smokers. Cancer. 1992; 70: 69–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kondo K, Tsuzuki H, Sasa M, et al. A dose -response relationship between the frequency of p53 mutations and tobacco consumption in lung cancer patients. J Surg Oncol. 1996; 61: 20–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Menhiratta S, Wig N, Verma S. Some psychological correlates of long-term heavy cannabis users. Br J Psychiatry. 1978; 132: 482–486.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Torabi M, Bailey W, Majd-Jabbari M. Cigarette smoking as a predictor of alcohol and other drug use by children and adolescents: Evidence of the “gateway drug effect”. J Sch Health. 1993; 63: 302–306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kandel D, Yamaguchi K, Chen K. Stages of progression in drug involvement from adolescence to adulthood: Further evidence for the gateway theory. J Stud Alcohol. 1992; 53: 447–457.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kouri E, Pope HG Jr., Yurgelun-Todd D, Gruber S. Attributes of heavy vs. occasional marijuana smokers in a college population. Biol Psychiatry. 1995; 38: 475–481.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Willard J, Schoenborn C. Relationship between cigarette smoking and other unhealthy behaviours among our nation’s youth: United States 1992 No. 264: National Center for Health Statistics, CDC; 1995.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Klonoff H, Clark C. Drug patterns in the chronic marijuana user. Int J Addict. 1976; 11: 71–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Kimlicka TM. A comparison of chronic versus casual marijuana users on personal values and behavioral orientations. Int J Addict. 1978; 13: 1145–1156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    McWhorter WP, Boyd GM, Mattson ME. Predictors of quitting smoking: The NHANES I follow-up experience. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990; 43: 1399–1405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Shiffman S. Tobacco “chippers”—individual differences in tobacco dependence. Psychopharmacology. 1989; 97: 539–547.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Owen N, Kent P, Wakefield M, Roberts L. Low-rate smokers. Prev Med. 1995; 24: 80–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wilson D, Wakefield M, Owen N, Roberts L. Characteristics of heavy smokers. Prev Med. 1992; 21: 311–319.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Shedler J, Block J. Adolescent drug use and psychological health. A longitudinal inquiry. Am Psychol. 1990; 45: 612–630.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Hamilton G, Cross D, Resnicow K, Hall M. A school-based harm minimization smoking intervention trial: Outcome results. Addiction. 2005; 100: 689–700.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hamilton G, Cross D, Resnicow K, Shaw T. Does harm minimisation lead to greater experimentation? Results from a school smoking intervention trial. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2007; 26: 605–613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Reddy S, Panday S, Swart D, et al. Umthenthe Uhlaba Usamila—The South African Youth Risk Behaviour Survey 2002. Capetown, South Africa: South African Medical Research Council; 2003.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Killip S, Mahfoud Z, Pearce K. What is an intracluster correlation coefficient? Crucial concepts for primary care researchers. Annals of Family Medicine. 2004; 2: 204–208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Crossett LS, Everett SA, Brener ND, Fishman JA, Pechacek TF. Adherence to the CDC guidelines for school health programs to prevent tobacco use and addiction. J Health Educ. 1999; 30: S4–S11.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Dijkstra M, Mesters I, De Vries H, van Breukelen G, Parcel G. Effectiveness of a social influence approach and boosters to smoking prevention. Health Educ Res. 1999; 14: 791–802.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Flay BR. Approaches to substance use prevention utilising school curriculum plus social environment change. Addict Behav. 2000; 25: 861–885.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Lantz PM, Jacobson PD, Warner KE, et al. Investing in youth tobacco control: A review of smoking prevention and control strategies. Tob Control. 2000; 9: 47–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Pentz M, Dwyer J, MacKinnon D, et al. A multicommunity trial for primary prevention of adolescent drug abuse. Effects on drug use prevalence. JAMA. 1989; 261: 3259–3266.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Pentz MA, MacKinnon DP, Dwyer JH, et al. Longitudinal effects of the Midwestern Prevention Project on regular and experimental smoking in adolescents. Prev Med. 1989; 18: 304–321.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Wakefield M, Flay B, Nichter M, Giovino G. Role of the media in influencing trajectories of youth smoking. Addiction. 2003; 98(Suppl 1): 79–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Skara S, Sussman S. A review of 25 long-term adolescent tobacco and other drug use prevention program evaluations. Prev Med. 2003; 37: 451–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Waldron I, Lye D, Brandon A. Gender differences in teenage smoking. Women Health. 1991; 17: 65–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Lynskey MT. The comorbidities of adolescent problem behaviors: A latent class model. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1994; 22: 339–354.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Fernander AF, Flisher AJ, King G, et al. Gender differences in depression and smoking among youth in Cape Town, South Africa. Ethn Dis. 2006; 16: 41–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Blitstein JL, Robinson LA, Murray DM, Klesges RC, Zbikowski SM. Rapid progression to regular cigarette smoking among nonsmoking adolescents: Interactions with gender and ethnicity. Prev Med. 2003; 36: 455–463.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Guthrie BJ, Young AM, Boyd CJ, Kintner EK. Dealing with daily hassles: Smoking and African-American adolescent girls. J Adolesc Health. 2001; 29: 109–115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    van Roosmalen EH, McDaniel SA. Adolescent smoking intentions: Gender differences in peer context. Adolescence. 1992; 27: 87–105.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Michell L, Amos A. Girls, pecking order and smoking. Soc Sci Med. 1997; 44: 1861–1869.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Luke D, Allen P, Arian G, et al. Teens’ images of smoking and smokers. Public Health Rep. 2001; 116(Suppl 1): 194–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Clayton S. Gender differences in psychosocial determinants of adolescent smoking. J Sch Health. 1991; 61: 115–120.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Botvin G, Baker E, Filazzola A, Botvin E. A cognitive-behavioral approach to substance abuse prevention: One-year follow-up. Addict Behav. 1990; 15: 47–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Biko S. I Write What I Like. Johannesburg, South Africa: Heinemann; 1978.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Ramose MB. The philosophy of ubuntu and ubuntu as a philosophy. In: Coetzee P, Roux A, eds. The African Philosophy Reader. New York: Routledge; 2003: 230–238.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Behavioral Medicine 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ken Resnicow
    • 1
  • Sasiragha Priscilla Reddy
    • 2
  • Shamagonam James
    • 2
  • Riyadh Gabebodeen Omardien
    • 3
  • Nilen Sunder Kambaran
    • 3
  • Heinrich George Langner
    • 3
  • Roger D. Vaughan
    • 4
  • Donna Cross
    • 5
  • Greg Hamilton
    • 6
  • Tracy Nichols
    • 7
  1. 1.School of Public HealthUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Medical Research Council of South AfricaCape TownSouth Africa
  3. 3.ARCH Actuarial ConsultingCape TownSouth Africa
  4. 4.Department of BiostatisticsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  5. 5.School of Exercise, Biomedical and Health SciencesEdith Cowan UniversityPerthAustralia
  6. 6.Community and Public HealthCanterbury District Health BoardChristchurchNew Zealand
  7. 7.Center for Women’s Health and Wellness, Health and Human PerformanceUniversity of North Carolina GreensboroGreensboroUSA

Personalised recommendations