The North Carolina Youth Empowerment Study (NCYES): A Participatory Research Study Examining the Impact of Youth Empowerment for Tobacco Use Prevention
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2004
The North Carolina Youth Empowerment Study (NCYES): A Participatory Research Study Examining the Impact of Youth Empowerment for Tobacco Use Prevention
This article describes the North Carolina Youth Empowerment Study (NC YES), a 3-year participatory evaluation of youth programs addressing tobacco use prevention. The study goals of NC YES were to (1) convene an advisory board comprised of lay youths and adults in a participatory research process, (2) document the characteristics of youth programs for tobacco use prevention and control in North Carolina, and (3) track the role of youth involvement in initiating and implementing 100% tobacco-free policies in local school districts. The NC YES Statewide Advisory Board helped guide the evaluation process, reviewed study protocols and data collection instruments, and helped interpret preliminary findings. Both quantitative and qualitative methods(e.g., telephone interviews and written questionnaires) were used to gather data from youth and adult leaders to achieve these aims. Lessons learned about the process of conducting participatory evaluation approaches and summary findings about the role of youths in policy advocacy efforts are presented.
1. Martin JD, Ribisl KM, Jefferson D, Houston A: Teen empowerment movement to prevent tobacco use by North Carolina’s youth. N C Med J62(5):260-265, 2001.
2.
2. Malek SH, Hopkins DP, Molloy M, McGloin T: The public health challenge of youth smoking in North Carolina. Putting what we know into practice. N C Med J63(3):153-161, 2002.
3.
3. Kim S, Crutchfield C, Williams C, Hepler N: Toward a new paradigm in substance abuse and other problem behavior prevention for youth: Youth development and empowerment approach. J Drug Educ28(1):1-17, 1998.
4.
4. Holden DJ, Messeri P, Evans WD, Crankshaw E, Ben-Davies M: Conceptualizing youth empowerment within tobacco control. Health Educ Behav31(5):548-563, 2004 (this issue).
5.
5. Chinman MJ, Linney JA: Toward a model of adolescent empowerment: Theoretical and empirical evidence. J Primary Prev18(4):393-413, 1998.
6.
6. Zimmerman MA: Empowerment theory: Psychological, organizational and community levels of analysis, in Rappaport J, Seidman E (eds): Handbook of Community Psychology. New York, Kluwer/Plenum, 2000, pp. 43-63.
7.
7. Tencati E, Kole SL, Feighery E, Winkleby MA, Altman DA: Teens as advocates for substance abuse prevention: Strategies for implementation. Health Promot Pract3:18-29, 2002.
8.
8. Brownson RC, Koffman DM, Novotny TE, Hughes RG, Eriksen MP: Environmental and policy interventions to control tobacco use and prevent cardiovascular disease. Health Educ Q22(4): 478-498, 1995.
9.
9. Whittet MN: Focus Groups With Youth Members of Tobacco Use Prevention Groups in North Carolina. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2003.
10.
10. Goldstein AO, Peterson AB, Ribisl KM, Steckler A, Linnan L, McGloin T, Patterson C: Passage of 100% tobacco-free school policies in 14 North Carolina school districts. J Sch Health73(8): 293-299, 2003.
11.
11. Conlisk E, Siegel M, Lengerich E, MacKenzie W, Malek S, Eriksen M: The status of local smoking regulations in North Carolina following a state preemption bill. JAMA273(10):805-807, 1995.
12.
12. George MA, Daniel M, Green LW: Appraising and funding participatory research in health promotion. Int Q of Community Health Educ18:181-197, 1999.
13.
13. Hohenemser LK, Marshall BD: Utilizing a youth development framework to establish and maintain a youth advisory committee. Health Promot Pract3:155-165, 2002.
14.
14. Gosin MN, Dustman PA, Drapeau AE, Harthun ML: Participatory action research: Creating an effective prevention curriculum for adolescents in the Southwestern US. Health Educ Res18(3):363-379, 2003.
15.
15. Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, Becker AB, Allen AJ, Guzman JR: Critical issues in developing and following community-based participatory research principles, in Minkler M, Wallerstein N (eds): Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass, 2003, pp. 53-76.
16.
16. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs. Atlanta, GA, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, CDC Office on Smoking and Health, 1999.
17.
17. Wakefield MA, Chaloupka FJ, Kaufman NJ, Orleans CT, Barker DC, Ruel EE: Effect of restrictions on smoking at home, at school, and in public places on teenage smoking: Cross sectional study. BMJ321(7257):333-337, 2000.
18.
18. School board splits on total tobacco ban. Alamance News, May 9, 2002, p. A6.
19.
19. Round P: Board considers total ban on tobacco. Sun Journal, March 1, 2002, p. A1.
20.
20. Kershaw JM: Forging new paths: A policy analysis of the youth-focused implementation of the Florida Tobacco Pilot Program, in Forst ML (ed.): Planning and Implementing Effective Tobacco Education and Prevention Programs. Springfield, IL, Charles C Thomas, 1999, pp. 17-37.
21.
21. Winkleby MA, Feighery EC, Altman DA, Kole S, Tencati E: Engaging ethnically diverse teens in a substance use prevention advocacy program. Am J Health Promot15(6):433-436, 2001.
22.
22. Unger JB, Rohrbach LA, Howard KA, Boley Cruz T, Johnson CA, Chen X: Attitudes toward anti-tobacco policy among California youth: Associations with smoking status, psychosocial variables and advocacy actions. Health Educ Res14(6):751-763, 1999.
23.
23. Altman DG, Feighery E, Robinson TN, Haydel KF, Strausberg L, Lorig K, Killen JD: Psychosocial factors associated with youth involvement in community activities promoting heart health. Health Educ Behav25(4):489-500, 1998.
