Current Addiction Reports

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 42–53 | Cite as

International Approaches to Tobacco Use Cessation Programs and Policy in Adolescents and Young Adults: Denmark

  • Nanna Schneekloth Jarlstrup
  • Knud Juel
  • Charlotta H. Pisinger
  • Morten Grønbæk
  • Søren Holm
  • Susan Andersen
Tobacco (S Sussman and R Garcia, Section Editors)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Tobacco


Purpose of Review

Smoking habits early in life are known to have important implications for lifetime smoking behaviors and efforts that discourage smoking among young people are essential for national tobacco control. In Denmark, various approaches have been taken to prevent or stop smoking in youth. This paper provides an overview of approaches to tobacco control policies and smoking cessation programs targeting adolescents and young adults in Denmark and presents current evidence of their effectiveness.

Recent Findings

Extensive research documents the effect of tobacco control policies on youth smoking behavior, especially that of increasing prices on tobacco. Further, it has been suggested that strategies addressing the social aspect of smoking should be emphasized.


This paper highlights that Denmark has an untapped potential within national tobacco control. Denmark should prioritize a comprehensive approach including enactment of tobacco control policies and implementation of interventions shown to be effective to prevent smoking initiation and encourage quitting among Danish youth.


Cigarette smoking Tobacco control policy Smoking cessation Smoking prevention Adolescents 



Many thanks to Tenna Clara Børsting Christiansen and Caroline Lyng Brandt from the Danish Cancer Society for detailed help with literature searching and knowledge sharing of smoking cessation programs in Denmark.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors have been previously published and complied with all applicable ethical standards (including the Helsinki declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines).


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.
    Nonnemaker JM, Farrelly MC. Smoking initiation among youth: the role of cigarette excise taxes and prices by race/ethnicity and gender. J Health Econ. 2011;30(3):560–7. Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pierce JP, White VM, Emery SL. What public health strategies are needed to reduce smoking initiation? Tob Control. 2012;21(2):258–64. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goriounova NA, Mansvelder HD. Short- and long-term consequences of nicotine exposure during adolescence for prefrontal cortex neuronal network function. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2012;2(12): a.
  4. 4.
    • Siqueira LM. Nicotine and tobacco as substances of abuse in children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2017;139(1). This technical report comprises important knowledge about the impact of nicotine on the brains of children and adolescents. The report includes different stages of use in progression to dependence on nicotine-containing products. Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    World Health Organisation. WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2017, monitoring tobacco use and prevention policies. World Health Organisation; 2017.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oberg M, Jaakkola MS, Woodward A, Peruga A, Pruss-Ustun A. Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second-hand smoke: a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries. Lancet. 2011;377(9760):139–46. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mathers CD, Loncar D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Med. 2006;3(11):e442. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reitsma MB, Fullman N, Ng M, Salama JS, Abajobir A, Abate KH, et al. Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2017;389(10082):1885–906. Scholar
  9. 9.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking—50 years of progress: a report of the surgeon general. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US), National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2014.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Joossens L, Raw M. The tobacco control scale 2016 in Europe. Association of European Cancer Leagues; 2017.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    American Cancer Society, World Lung Foundation. The Tobacco Atlas [Available from:
  12. 12.
    Schaap MM, Kunst AE, Leinsalu M, Regidor E, Ekholm O, Dzurova D, et al. Effect of nationwide tobacco control policies on smoking cessation in high and low educated groups in 18 European countries. Tob Control. 2008;17(4):248–55. Scholar
  13. 13.
    World Health Organisation. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. World Health Organisation; 2003.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    • Gravely S, Giovino GA, Craig L, Commar A, D’Espaignet ET, Schotte K, et al. Implementation of key demand-reduction measures of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and change in smoking prevalence in 126 countries: an association study. Lancet Public Health. 2017;2(4):e166–e74. This study provides a comprehensive global assessment of the association between high-level implementation of key tobacco control measures recommended in the WHO FCTC and smoking prevalence and highlights the importance and potential of the treaty in a global context. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    The Danish Cancer Society, Trygfonden. Smoke-free future [In Danish: Røgfri fremtid] [Available from:
  16. 16.
    The Danish Health Authority., The Danish Cancer Society., The Danish Heart Foundation., The Danish Lung Foundation. Surveillance of smoking habits in the Danish population [In Danish: Monitorering af danskernes rygevaner 2016]. 2017.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huisman M, Kunst AE, Mackenbach JP. Inequalities in the prevalence of smoking in the European Union: comparing education and income. Prev Med. 2005;40(6):756–64. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Egan KK, Pisinger V, Christensen AI, Tolstrup JS. Smoking among students in high school and vocational school [in Danish: Rygevaner blandt gymnasie- og erhversskoleelever]. Copenhagen: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark; 2017.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    • Pisinger V, Mikkelsen SS, Bendtsen P, Egan KK, Tolstrup JS. The Danish National Youth Study 2014: Study design, population characteristics and non-response analysis. Scandinavian journal of public health. 2017:1403494817729283. This study contributes with important knowledge on adolescent health behavior, health, and well-being. The study is the largest questionnaire-based survey conducted among Danish youth. It is unique in its size, diversity of questionnaire content, and high participation rate. Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kuipers MA, Nagelhout GE, Willemsen MC, Kunst AE. Widening educational inequalities in adolescent smoking following national tobacco control policies in the Netherlands in 2003: a time-series analysis. Addiction. 2014;109(10):1750–9. Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lykke M, Helbech B, Glumer C. Temporal changes in the attitude towards smoking bans in public arenas among adults in the Capital Region of Denmark from 2007 to 2010. Scand J Public Health. 2014;42(5):401–8. Scholar
  22. 22.
    Levy DT, Chaloupka F, Gitchell J. The effects of tobacco control policies on smoking rates: a tobacco control scorecard. J Public Health Manag Practice : JPHMP. 2004;10(4):338–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dobbie F, Hitchman S, McNeill A, Bauld L. International Tobacco Control. Curr Add Rep. 2015;2(1):1–7. Scholar
  24. 24.
    • Frazer K, Callinan JE, McHugh J, van Baarsel S, Clarke A, Doherty K, et al. Legislative smoking bans for reducing harms from secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD005992. This paper provides a comprehensive and systematic overview of the existing evidence of the effects of legislative smoking bans on several health and smoking behavior outcomes and includes important information on subgroup differences. Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hopkins DP, Razi S, Leeks KD, Priya Kalra G, Chattopadhyay SK, Soler RE. Smokefree policies to reduce tobacco use. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38(2 Suppl):S275–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hawkins SS, Bach N, Baum CF. Impact of tobacco control policies on adolescent smoking. J Adolesc Health. 2016;58(6):679–85. Scholar
  27. 27.
    • Hoffman SJ, Tan C. Overview of systematic reviews on the health-related effects of government tobacco control policies. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:744. This paper thoroughly synthesizes a huge body of research evidence on the effectiveness of government tobacco control policies and covers several of interventions, outcomes, conditions, and populations in a single analysis. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    The Danish Health Authority. Technical proposal for Cancer Plan IV. [In Danish: Styrket indsats på kræftområdet. Fagligt oplæg til Kræftplan IV]. The Danish Health Authority: Copenhagen; 2016.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liang L, Chaloupka F, Nichter M, Clayton R. Prices, policies and youth smoking, May 2001. Addiction. 2003;98:105–22. Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chaloupka FJ, Straif K, Leon ME, Working Group IAfRoC. Effectiveness of tax and price policies in tobacco control. Tob Control. 2011;20(3):235–8. Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gallus S, Schiaffino A, Vecchia CL, Townsend J, Fernandez E. Price and cigarette consumption in Europe. Tob Control. 2006;15(2):114–9. Scholar
  32. 32.
    Carpenter C, Cook PJ. Cigarette taxes and youth smoking: new evidence from national, state, and local Youth Risk Behavior Surveys. J Health Econ. 2008;27(2):287–99. Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tauras JA, Huang J, Chaloupka FJ. Differential impact of tobacco control policies on youth sub-populations. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013;10(9):4306–22. Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nikaj S, Chaloupka FJ. The effect of prices on cigarette use among youths in the Global Youth Tobacco Survey. Nicotine Tobacco Res. 2014;16(Suppl_1):S16–23. Scholar
  35. 35.
    Thomas S, Fayter D, Misso K, Ogilvie D, Petticrew M, Sowden A, et al. Population tobacco control interventions and their effects on social inequalities in smoking: systematic review. Tob Control. 2008;17(4):230–7. Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rice N, Godfrey C, Slack R, Sowden A, Worthy G. A systematic review of the effects of price on the smoking behaviour of young people. York: Public Health Research Consortium; 2010.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Harris JE, Chan SW. The continuum-of-addiction: cigarette smoking in relation to price among Americans aged 15-29. Health Econ. 1999;8(1):81–6.<81::AID-HEC401>3.0.CO;2-D.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    World Health Organ WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2017. Country profile: Denmark. World Health Organisation; 2017.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ministry of Taxation Notice on tobacco. Denmark: ministry of Taxation; 2009.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bloze G, Rizvanovic A, Malchow-Møller N, Bech M. Increased tobacco tax. Influences on tobacco consumption, border trade and the state tax revenue. [in Danish: Forhøjet tobaksafgift. Påvirkning af tobaksforbrug, grænsehandel samt statens afgiftsprovenu]. Vidensråd for Forebyggelse: Copenhagen; 2012.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ministry of Taxation. Status over border trade 2016. Denmark, Ministry of Taxation; 2016.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Flachs EM, Koch MB, Juel K. Health consequences of changes in tobacco price [in Danish: Sundhedsmæssige konsekvenser ved ændringer i tobaksprisen]. Copenhagen: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark; 2013.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lykke M, Pisinger C, Glumer C. Ready for a goodbye to tobacco? Assessment of support for endgame strategies on smoking among adults in a Danish regional health survey. Prev Med. 2016;83:5–10. Scholar
  44. 44.
    Tænketanken Mandag Morgen. Between broccoli and beer - health prevention according to the Danes [In Danish: Mellem broccoli og bajere - forebyggelse ifølge danskerne]. Copenhagen; 2017.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Richardson L, Hemsing N, Greaves L, Assanand S, Allen P, McCullough L, et al. Preventing smoking in young people: a systematic review of the impact of access interventions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2009;6(4):1485–514. Scholar
  46. 46.
    Stead LF, Lancaster T. Interventions for preventing tobacco sales to minors. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2002(1):Cd001497.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    DiFranza JR. Which interventions against the sale of tobacco to minors can be expected to reduce smoking? Tob Control. 2012;21(4):436–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fichtenberg CM, Glantz SA. Youth access interventions do not affect youth smoking. Pediatrics. 2002;109(6):1088–92. Scholar
  49. 49.
    Executive order on the prohibition of tobacco sales for persons under 18 years and the sale of alcohol to persons under the age of 16. [In Danish: Bekendtgørelse af lov om forbud mod salg af tobak til personer under 18 år og salg af alkohol til personer under 16 år], LBK nr. 1020 af 21/10/2008 (2008).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Schmidt A, Rasmussen L, Økjær A. [In Danish: Der er ingen straf for at sælge tobak til børn - nabolande går andre veje]. Politiken 2017.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    DiFranza JR, Wellman RJ, Sargent JD, Weitzman M, Hipple BJ, Winickoff JP. Tobacco promotion and the initiation of tobacco use: assessing the evidence for causality. Pediatrics. 2006;117(6):e1237–48. Scholar
  52. 52.
    Freeman D, Brucks M, Wallendorf M, Boland W. Youths' understandings of cigarette advertisements. Addict Behav. 2009;34(1):36–42. Scholar
  53. 53.
    Robertson L, McGee R, Marsh L, Hoek J. A systematic review on the impact of point-of-sale tobacco promotion on smoking. Nicotine Tob Res : Off J Soc Res Nicotine Tob. 2015;17(1):2–17. Scholar
  54. 54.
    • Depue JB, Southwell BG, Betzner AE, Walsh BM. Encoded exposure to tobacco use in social media predicts subsequent smoking behavior. Am J Health Promot. 2015;29(4):259–61. This is the first study to specifically assess the role of social media in maintaining or increasing tobacco behavior. These findings emphasize social media as an important predictor in research that examines smoking behavior especially among young people. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Cavazos-Rehg PA, Krauss MJ, Spitznagel EL, Grucza RA, Bierut LJ. Hazards of new media: youth's exposure to tobacco ads/promotions. Nicotine Tob Res : Off J Soc Res Nicotine Tob. 2014;16(4):437–44. Scholar
  56. 56.
    Freeman B, Chapman S. British American Tobacco on Facebook: undermining Article 13 of the global World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Tob Control. 2010;19(3):e1–9. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Shadel WG, Tharp-Taylor S, Fryer CS. How does exposure to cigarette advertising contribute to smoking in adolescents? The role of the developing self-concept and identification with advertising models. Addict Behav. 2009;34(11):932–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Saffer H, Chaloupka F. The effect of tobacco advertising bans on tobacco consumption. J Health Econ. 2000;19(6):1117–37. Scholar
  59. 59.
    The Danish Consumer Ombudsman. Danish Consumer Ombudsman report 7-Eleven and House of Prince to the police 2016 Available from:
  60. 60.
    The Danish Consumer Ombudsman. Danish Consumer Ombudsman finds no illegal tobacco sponsorship on music festivals 2014 [Available from:
  61. 61.
    Hesse M, Tutenges S, Schliewe S. The use of tobacco and cannabis at an international music festival. Eur Addict Res. 2010;16(4):208–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hoek J, Gendall P, Eckert C, Kemper J, Louviere J. Effects of brand variants on smokers' choice behaviours and risk perceptions. Tob Control. 2016;25(2):160–5. Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wakefield MA, Germain D, Durkin SJ. How does increasingly plainer cigarette packaging influence adult smokers’ perceptions about brand image? An experimental study. Tob Control. 2008;17(6):416–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Scheffels J, Lund I. The impact of cigarette branding and plain packaging on perceptions of product appeal and risk among young adults in Norway: a between-subjects experimental survey. BMJ Open. 2013;3(12):e003732. Scholar
  65. 65.
    Stead M, Moodie C, Angus K, Bauld L, McNeill A, Thomas J, et al. Is consumer response to plain/standardised tobacco packaging consistent with framework convention on tobacco control guidelines? A systematic review of quantitative studies. PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e75919. Scholar
  66. 66.
    Doxey J, Hammond D. Deadly in pink: the impact of cigarette packaging among young women. Tob Control. 2011;20(5):353–60. Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hammond D, Daniel S, White CM. The effect of cigarette branding and plain packaging on female youth in the United Kingdom. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(2):151–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Hammond D. Health warning messages on tobacco products: a review. Tob Control. 2011;20(5):327–37. Scholar
  69. 69.
    The Ministry of Health. [In Danish: SUU Alm. del. Endeligt svar på spørgsmål 1022] Denmark: The Ministry of Health; 2016 [Available from:
  70. 70.
    European Union Tobacco Products Directive: Denmark [In Danish: Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2014/40/EU af 3. april 2014 om indbyrdes tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes love og administrative bestemmelser om fremstilling, præsentation og salg af tobak og relaterede produkter og om ophævelse af direktiv 2001/37/EF], 2014/40/EU (2014).Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    The Danish National Quit-line. Status for 2016. Copenhagen; 2016.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Durkin S, Brennan E, Wakefield M. Mass media campaigns to promote smoking cessation among adults: an integrative review. Tob Control. 2012;21(2):127–38. Scholar
  73. 73.
    The Danish Health Authority. Evaluation of the smoking cessation campaign “Every cigarette is doing you damage” October 2009–January 2010. [in Danish: “Hver eneste cigaret skader dig” – Evaluering af Sundhedsstyrelsens rygestopkampagne oktober 2009 - januar 2010]. The Danish Health Authority: Copenhagen; 2010.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    The Danish Health Authority. “Help to stop smoking”-campaign [In Danish: “Hjælp til rygestop”-kampagnen] Copenhagen: The Danish Health Authority; 2016 [Available from:
  75. 75.
    The Danish Health Authority. “But Why”-campaign [In Danish: “But Why?” kampagnen] Copenhagen: The Danish Health Authority; 2017 [Available from:
  76. 76.
    Kristensen M, Sølvhøj I, Ryd J, Rod M. Smoking prevention campaigns targeted at adolescents—what works? [in Danish: Rygeforebyggelseskampagner målrettet unge – hvad virker?]. Copenhagen: National Institute of Public Health; 2017.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Christensen TM, Moller L, Jorgensen T, Pisinger C. The impact of the Danish smoking ban on hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2014;21(1):65–73. Scholar
  78. 78.
    Aarestrup AK, Due TD, Juel K. Evaluation of The Smoke-Free Environment Act [in Danish: Evaluering af loven om røgfri miljøer - lov nr. 512 af 6. juni 2007]. Copenhagen: The National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark; 2009.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hojgaard B, Olsen KR, Pisinger C, Tonnesen H, Gyrd-Hansen D. The potential of smoking cessation programmes and a smoking ban in public places: comparing gain in life expectancy and cost effectiveness. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39(8):785–96. Scholar
  80. 80.
    Farrelly MC, Loomis BR, Han B, Gfroerer J, Kuiper N, Couzens GL, et al. A comprehensive examination of the influence of state tobacco control programs and policies on youth smoking. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(3):549–55. Scholar
  81. 81.
    Crosnoe R, Benner AD, Schneider B. Drinking, socioemotional functioning, and academic progress in secondary school. J Health SocBehav. 2012;53(2):150–64.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Galanti MR, Coppo A, Jonsson E, Bremberg S, Faggiano F. Anti-tobacco policy in schools: upcoming preventive strategy or prevention myth? A review of 31 studies. Tob Control. 2014;23(4):295–301. Scholar
  83. 83.
    Agaku IT, Obadan EM, Odukoya OO, Olufajo O. Tobacco-free schools as a core component of youth tobacco prevention programs: a secondary analysis of data from 43 countries. Eur J Pub Health. 2015;25(2):210–5. Scholar
  84. 84.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US), National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2012.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Shackleton N, Jamal F, Viner RM, Dickson K, Patton G, Bonell C. School-based interventions going beyond health education to promote adolescent health: systematic review of reviews. J Adolesc Health. 2016;58(4):382–96. Scholar
  86. 86.
    • Andersen A, Krølner R, Bast LS, Thygesen LC, Due P. Effects of the X:IT smoking intervention: a school-based cluster randomized trial. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44(6):1900–8. This study contributes with important knowledge of the effects of a multicomponent school-based intervention on preventing smoking uptake in Danish adolescents. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Bast LS, Due P, Bendtsen P, Ringgard L, Wohllebe L, Damsgaard MT, et al. High impact of implementation on school-based smoking prevention: the X:IT study—a cluster-randomized smoking prevention trial. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):125. Scholar
  88. 88.
    Bast LS, Due P, Ersbøll AK, Damsgaard MT, Andersen A. Association of School Characteristics and Implementation in the X:IT study—a school-randomized smoking prevention program. J Sch Health. 2017;87(5):329–37. Scholar
  89. 89.
    Stead LF, Carroll AJ, Lancaster T. Group behaviour therapy programmes for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;3
  90. 90.
    • Fanshawe TR, Halliwell W, Lindson N, Aveyard P, Livingstone-Banks J, Hartmann-Boyce J. Tobacco cessation interventions for young people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;11:Cd003289. This paper provides an updated, comprehensive, and systematic overview of the existing evidence of smoking cessation intervention for young people. The conclusion emphasizes that there continues to be a need for well-designed trials of interventions for young smokers. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Stanton A, Grimshaw G. Tobacco cessation interventions for young people. Cochrane DatabaseSystRev. 2013;8:CD003289.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Rasmussen M, Fernandez E, Tonnesen H. Effectiveness of the Gold Standard Programme compared with other smoking cessation interventions in Denmark: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(2):e013553. Scholar
  93. 93.
    Rasmussen M, Tønnesen H. The Danish smoking cessation database. Clin Health Prom 2016;6(2).Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Ybarra ML, Jiang Y, Free C, Abroms LC, Whittaker R. Participant-level meta-analysis of mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation across different countries. Prev Med. 2016;89(Supplement C):90–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Whittaker R, McRobbie H, Bullen C, Rodgers A, Gu Y. Mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    • Taylor GMJ, Dalili MN, Semwal M, Civljak M, Sheikh A, Car J. Internet-based interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017(9). This systematic review contributes with important knowledge on the evidence of internet-based smoking cessation interventions. The findings suggest that treatment effectiveness in younger people is unknown. Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Brandt CL, Dalum P, Skov-Ettrup L, Tolstrup JS. “After all—it doesn’t kill you to quit smoking”: an explorative analysis of the blog in a smoking cessation intervention. Scand J Public Health. 2013;41(7):655–61. Scholar
  98. 98.
    Stobbe M. The digital way to smoking cessation: a mixed method study of the impact of Xhale on smoking cessation [in Danish: den digitale vej til rygestop: en mixed methods undersøgelse af betydningen af Xhale for et rygestop] [master thesis]: University of Copenhagen; 2017.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    World Summit Awards. XHALE winner of the WSA-Mobile 2016 [Available from:
  100. 100.
    Kolbye RJ, Jensen PD.—new media for smoking cessation for young people [in Danish: Digitale medier og rygestop. - erfaringer og effekt]. The Danish Cancer Society; 2006.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Skov-Ettrup LS, Ringgaard LW, Dalum P, Flensborg-Madsen T, Thygesen LC, Tolstrup JS. Comparing tailored and untailored text messages for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial among adolescent and young adult smokers. Health Educ Res. 2014;29(2):195–205. Scholar
  102. 102.
    Gilbert H, Sutton S, Sutherland G. Who calls QUIT®? The characteristics of smokers seeking advice via a telephone helpline compared with smokers attending a clinic and those in the general population. Public Health. 2005;119(10):933–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Stead LF, Hartmann-Boyce J, Perera R, Lancaster T. Telephone counselling for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;8Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    The Danish National Quit-line and The Danish Health Authority. Stoplinien [Available from:
  105. 105.
    Rasmussen SR. The cost effectiveness of telephone counselling to aid smoking cessation in Denmark: a modelling study. Scand J Public Health. 2013;41(1):4–10. Scholar
  106. 106.
    Skov-Ettrup LS, Dalum P, Bech M, Tolstrup JS. The effectiveness of telephone counselling and internet- and text-message-based support for smoking cessation: results from a randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2016;111(7):1257–66. Scholar
  107. 107.
    Thomas RE, McLellan J, Perera R. School-based programmes for preventing smoking. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2013(4):Cd001293.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Minary L, Cambon L, Martini H, Wirth N, Acouetey DS, Thouvenot F, et al. Efficacy of a smoking cessation program in a population of adolescent smokers in vocational schools: a public health evaluative controlled study. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Ingholt L, Sorensen BB, Andersen S, Zinckernagel L, Friis-Holmberg T, Frank VA, et al. How can we strengthen students' social relations in order to reduce school dropout? An intervention development study within four Danish vocational schools. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):502. Scholar
  110. 110.
    Steno AM. Youth in an education time: gendered, classed and time-bound dribble in and between vocational education and training [in Danish: Ungdomsliv i en Uddannelsestid: Kønnede, klassede og tidsbundne driblerier i og mellem erhvervsuddannelser]: the Department of Psychology and Educational Studies, Roskilde University; 2015.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Oxford Research A/S. Final evaluation of project 'Skod Det Nu' [In Danish: Slutevaluering af Rygning - Skod Det Nu]. The Danish Health Authority; 2015.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    • Andersen S, Rod MH, Ersboll AK, Stock C, Johansen C, Holmberg T, et al. Effects of a settings-based intervention to promote student wellbeing and reduce smoking in vocational schools: a non-randomized controlled study. Social Science & Medicine. 2016;161:195-203. This is the first Danish intervention study to specifically target the social context of adolescent smoking. The paper reports on intervention effects on smoking of a school-based social environment intervention. Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    The Danish Health Authority. Young and smoking: inspiration catalog [in Danish: Unge og rygning: inspirationskatalog]. Copenhagen: The Danish Health Authority; 2016.Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Rod MH, Ingholt L, Sorensen BB, Tjornhoj-Thomsen T. The spirit of the intervention: reflections on social effectiveness in public health intervention research. Critical Public Health. 2014;24(3):296–307. Scholar
  115. 115.
    Bolt K, Rosengaard C. Healty vocational schools [in Danish: Sunde Erhvervsskoler]. The Danish Health Authority: Copenhagen; 2012.Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Dalum P, Paludan-Muller G, Engholm G, Kok G. A cluster randomised controlled trial of an adolescent smoking cessation intervention: short and long-term effects. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40(2):167–76. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nanna Schneekloth Jarlstrup
    • 1
  • Knud Juel
    • 1
  • Charlotta H. Pisinger
    • 2
  • Morten Grønbæk
    • 1
  • Søren Holm
    • 3
  • Susan Andersen
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Public HealthUniversity of Southern DenmarkCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Research Center for Prevention and HealthUniversity of CopenhagenGlostrupDenmark
  3. 3.The Municipality of AarhusAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations