Introduction: Cigarette smoking among adolescents remains a major public health concern given the frequent persistence of this behavior into adulthood (Colditz & Hunter 2000). WHO estimates that unless the current smoking pattern is reversed, tobacco will be responsible for 10 million deaths per year by the decade 2020–2030, with 70% of them occurring in developing countries. (WHO 2007, 2) Adolescents should have knowledge and awareness of the ill-effects of cigarette smoking, which play an important role in preventing the diseases. Objectives: 1) To assess the pre-test knowledge score regarding the ill-effects of cigarette smoking among adolescents. 2) To assess the post-test knowledge score regarding the ill-effects of cigarette smoking among adolescents. 3) To compare the pre-test and post-test knowledge scores regarding the ill-effects of cigarette smoking among adolescents. 4) To nd the association between the pre-test knowledge score and selected demographic variables among adolescents. Material And Methods: A quantitative approach and Quasi experimental one group pre-test post-test design were used for this study. The study was conducted among 60 adolescent boys at Govt. High School, Perumpazhuthoor. A non-randomized purposive sampling technique was used for this study. The tool consists of two parts. Section I: demographic variables; and Section II: self-administered knowledge questionnaire. Result: The ndings in the present study revealed that the paired t value computed at 17.47 (df = 59) by comparison of the mean pre-test and post-test knowledge scores (10.33 + 4.13, 16.55 + 2.94) was statistically signicant at P< 0.05. The above results revealed that there was a signicant difference between pre-test and post-test scores among high school children after a structured teaching program. Conclusion: The high school children had gained knowledge on the ill-effects of smoking after a structured teaching program in the post test assessment. The mean pre-test and post-test knowledge scores (10.33 + 4.13, 16.55 + 2.94) were statistically signicant at P< 0.05.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liza et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: