12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Tobacco use prevalence and factors associated with tobacco use in new U.S. Army personnel.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study examined the prevalence of tobacco use and factors associated with pre-military service cigarette and smokeless tobacco use. From January 2000 to December 2006, military students arriving for Advanced Individual Training at the U.S. Army Ordnance School completed a questionnaire that asked about their use of tobacco products. The prevalence of smokeless tobacco use from 2000 to 2006 for women generally decreased, as did the number of cigarettes smoked per day by men. For men and women, factors associated with cigarette use included younger age, Caucasian race, and use of smokeless tobacco. Factors associated with smokeless tobacco use among men included younger age, Caucasian race, and cigarette use. For women, cigarette use was the only factor associated with smokeless tobacco use. The identified factors in this study could be used to establish strategies in the future to reduce tobacco use in the military.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          J Addict Dis
          Journal of addictive diseases
          1545-0848
          1055-0887
          Jul 2010
          : 29
          : 3
          Affiliations
          [1 ] Directorate of Epidemiology and Disease Surveillance, United States Army Public Health Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010, USA. Tyson.Grier@us.army.mil
          Article
          924379074
          10.1080/10550887.2010.489445
          20635278
          16a529cc-cdcc-4155-a463-f30fbbce00fe
          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article