school based
Recently Published Documents





2022 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 103628
Stine Solberg ◽  
Geir Nyborg ◽  
Liv Heidi Mjelve ◽  
Anne Edwards ◽  
Anne Arnesen

2022 ◽  
pp. 003335492110655
Chloe A. Teasdale ◽  
Luisa N. Borrell ◽  
Yanhan Shen ◽  
Spencer Kimball ◽  
Michael L. Rinke ◽  

Objectives: Testing remains critical for identifying pediatric cases of COVID-19 and as a public health intervention to contain infections. We surveyed US parents to measure the proportion of children tested for COVID-19 since the start of the pandemic, preferred testing venues for children, and acceptability of school-based COVID-19 testing. Methods: We conducted an online survey of 2074 US parents of children aged ≤12 years in March 2021. We applied survey weights to generate national estimates, and we used Rao–Scott adjusted Pearson χ2 tests to compare incidence by selected sociodemographic characteristics. We used Poisson regression models with robust SEs to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) of pediatric testing. Results: Among US parents, 35.9% reported their youngest child had ever been tested for COVID-19. Parents who were female versus male (aRR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79), Asian versus non-Hispanic White (aRR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.87), and from the Midwest versus the Northeast (aRR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91) were less likely to report testing of a child. Children who had health insurance versus no health insurance (aRR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.05-1.81), were attending in-person school/daycare versus not attending (aRR = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.43-1.95), and were from households with annual household income ≥$100 000 versus income <$50 000-$99 999 (aRR = 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.40) were more likely to have tested for COVID-19. Half of parents (52.7%) reported the pediatrician’s office as the most preferred testing venue, and 50.6% said they would allow their youngest child to be tested for COVID-19 at school/daycare if required. Conclusions: Greater efforts are needed to ensure access to COVID-19 testing for US children, including those without health insurance.

PLoS ONE ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. e0259560
May C. I. van Schalkwyk ◽  
Mark Petticrew ◽  
Nason Maani ◽  
Ben Hawkins ◽  
Chris Bonell ◽  

Background and aim For decades, corporations such as the tobacco and fossil fuel industries have used youth education programmes and schools to disseminate discourses, ideas and values favourable to their positions, and to pre-empt regulation that threatens profits. However, there is no systematic research into alcohol industry-funded youth education programmes. This article serves to address this important gap in the literature. Methods Using a discourse theoretical approach informed by poststructural discourse theory and critical discourse analysis, we analysed teaching materials from three school-based youth education initiatives which focus on alcohol consumption and health harms: Drinkaware for Education, The Smashed Project (funded by Diageo), and Talk About Alcohol (Alcohol Education Trust). These materials, some of which are disseminated internationally, are provided to schools through intermediary bodies in receipt of alcohol industry funding. Findings The analysis found that these materials drew from and presented discourses of personal responsibility, moderate alcohol consumption, and involved a narrowing of the problem definition and causes. The locus of the problem is located by the discourses within individuals including youth, with causes of youth alcohol consumption repeatedly presented as peer pressure and ‘poor choices’, with little or no mention of alcohol industry marketing or other practices. All programmes promoted familiarisation and normalisation of alcohol as a ‘normal’ adult consumer product which children must learn about and master how to use responsibly when older. The discourses constructed in these materials closely align with those of other alcohol industry corporate social responsibility discourses which employ selective presentation of harms, including misinformation about cancer, and ambiguous terms such as “responsible drinking”. Furthermore, the role of alcohol price, availability and access, and the impacts of alcohol and the industry on inequities were not articulated within the discourses. The research was limited to an analysis of teaching materials and further research is needed to explore their impact on youth, teachers and wider discourses and social norms. Conclusion Alcohol industry-sponsored youth education programmes serve industry interests and promote moderate consumption while purportedly educating children about harms and influences of alcohol use. There are considerable conflicts of interest in the delivery of alcohol education programmes funded by the alcohol industry and intermediary bodies in receipt of such funding. Alcohol education materials should be developed independent from industry, including funding, and should empower children and young people to understand and think critically about alcohol, including harms and drivers of consumption, and effective interventions needed to protect them and others from alcohol-related harms. Independent organisations can use this analysis to critique their materials to strengthen alignment with meeting student and public health interests. The ongoing exposure of children and young people to such conflicted and misleading materials needs urgent attention from policymakers, practitioners, teachers and parents, and resources dependent on industry support should cease being used in schools.

Christina Gillies ◽  
Rosanne Blanchet ◽  
Rebecca Gokiert ◽  
Anna Farmer ◽  
Noreen D. Willows

Comprehensive school-based nutrition interventions offer a promising strategy to support healthy eating for First Nations children. A targeted strategic review was performed to identify nutrition interventions in 514 First Nation-operated schools across Canada through their websites. Directed content analysis was used to describe if interventions used 1 or more of the 4 components of the Comprehensive School Health (CSH) framework. Sixty schools had interventions. Nearly all (n = 56, 93%) schools offered breakfast, snack, and (or) lunch programs (social and physical environment). About one-third provided opportunities for students to learn about traditional healthy Indigenous foods and food procurement methods (n = 18, 30%) (teaching and learning) or facilitated connections between the school and students’ families or the community (n = 16, 27%) (partnerships and services). Few schools (n = 10, 17%) had a nutrition policy outlining permitted foods (school policy). Less than 1% (n = 3) of interventions included all 4 CSH components. Results suggest that most First Nation-operated schools provide children with food, but few have nutrition interventions that include multiple CSH components. First Nation-operated schools may require additional financial and (or) logistical support to implement comprehensive school-based nutrition interventions, which have greater potential to support long-term health outcomes for children than single approaches.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document