Skip to content

http://miptoolkit.com/

Increase font size Decrease font size Default font size default color orange color green color
You are here: Home Modules Module Examples Module 3 Examples Example 15 - Synergistic and antagonistic effects: Tobacco reduction interventions
Example 15 - Synergistic and antagonistic effects: Tobacco reduction interventions Print E-mail
Module 3 Examples

Ontario Public Health PractionersAn anti-smoking campaign in China had schoolchildren write letters to their fathers that said “Please stop smoking, I want you to be a grandfather.” The goal was to shift male smokers from not thinking at all about their smoking habits to contemplating them. The next step was a public-awareness campaign aimed at the “contemplators.” The rate of smoking cessation was two to three times higher than would have been achieved by a public-awareness campaign alone.

Combining the wrong interventions can have an antagonistic, or negative, effect. Avoiding antagonistic combinations can increase the impact of interventions. Antagonistic effects happen when joint actions decrease the overall effectiveness of your program. For example, when we asked public- health nurses to screen women for smoking, they found less than two percent of high-risk women expecting multiples were smokers. The nurses said they were reluctant to talk to those women about smoking, because that might diminish trust and reduce the impact of interventions that were going well, such as counselling on breastfeeding. (Edwards, 2005).

Last Updated on Monday, 01 June 2009 07:47