Peer substance use overestimation among French university students: a cross-sectional survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Normative misperceptions have been widely documented for alcohol use among U.S. college students. There is less research on other substances or European cultural contexts. This study explores which factors are associated with alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use misperceptions among French college students, focusing on substance use.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>12 classes of second-year college students (n = 731) in sociology, medicine, nursing or foreign language estimated the proportion of tobacco, cannabis, alcohol use and heavy episodic drinking among their peers and reported their own use.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Peer substance use overestimation frequency was 84% for tobacco, 55% for cannabis, 37% for alcohol and 56% for heavy episodic drinking. Cannabis users (p = 0.006), alcohol (p = 0.003) and heavy episodic drinkers (p = 0.002), are more likely to overestimate the prevalence of use of these consumptions. Tobacco users are less likely to overestimate peer prevalence of smoking (p = 0.044). Women are more likely to overestimate tobacco (p < 0.001) and heavy episodic drinking (p = 0.007) prevalence. Students having already completed another substance use questionnaire were more likely to overestimate alcohol use prevalence (p = 0.012). Students exposed to cannabis prevention campaigns were more likely to overestimate cannabis (p = 0.018) and tobacco use (p = 0.022) prevalence. Other identified factors are class-level use prevalences and academic discipline.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Local interventions that focus on creating realistic perceptions of substance use prevalence could be considered for cannabis and alcohol prevention in French campuses.</p

Social norms interventions to reduce alcohol misuse in University or College students

Background Drinking is influenced by youth (mis)perceptions of how their peers drink. If misperceptions can be corrected, young people may drink less. Objectives To determine whether social norms feedback reduces alcohol misuse in university or college students. Search strategy Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Register of Trials; Central; MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsyInfo; CINAHL (up to March 2008). Selection criteria RCT or cluster RCT that evaluate social normative intervention with no intervention, alcohol education leaflet or other non-normative feedback intervention Data collection and analysis 2/3 authors extracted data. Included studies were assessed against criteria indicated in the Cochrane Reviewers Handbook version 5.0.0. Main results Twenty-two studies were included (7,275 participants). Alcohol related problems: Significant reduction with Web/computer feedback (WF) (SMD -0.31 95% Cl -0.59 to -0.02), three studies, 278 participants. No significant effect of mailed feedback (MF), individual face-to-face feedback (IFF) or group face-to-face feedback (GFF). Peak Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) : Significant reduction with WF (SMD -0.77 95% Cl -1.25 to -0.28), two studies, 198 participants. No significant effect of MF or IFF. Drinking Frequency: Significant reduction with WF (SMD -0.38 95% Cl -0.63 to -0.13), two studies, 243 participants and IFF (SMD -0.39 95% Cl -0.66 to -0.12), two studies, 217 participants. No significant effect of MF. Drinking Quantity: Significant reduction with WF (SMD -0.35 95% Cl -0.51 to -0.18), five studies, 556 participants and GFF (SMD -0.32 95% Cl -0.63 to -0.02) three studies, 173 participants. No significant effect of MF or IF. Binge drinking: Significant reduction with WF (SMD -0.47 95% Cl -0.92 to -0.03) one study, 80 participants, IFF (SMD -0.25 95% Cl -0.49 to -0.02) three studies, 278 participants and and GFF (SMD -0.38 95% Cl -0.62 to -0.14) four studies, 264 participants. No significant effect for MF. BAC: No significant effect of MF and IFF Drinking norms: Significant reduction with WF (SMD -0.75 95% Cl -0.98 to -0.52 ) three studies, 312 participants. Authors' conclusions WF and IFF are probably effective in reducing alcohol misuse. No direct comparisons of WF against IFF were found, but WF impacted across a broader set of outcomes and is less costly so therefore might be preferred. Significant effects were more apparent for short-term outcomes (up to three months). For mailed and group feedback, and social norms marketing campaigns, the results are on the whole not significant and therefore cannot be recommended