A longitudinal examination of risk and protective factors for cigarette smoking among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth.

Newcomb ME, Heinz AJ, Birkett M, Mustanski B. A longitudinal examination of risk and protective factors for cigarette smoking among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. 2014 May 1; 54(5):558-64.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

PURPOSE: To investigate change across development in two smoking outcomes (smoking status and rate), describe demographic differences in smoking, and longitudinally examine the effects of psychosocial variables on smoking (psychological distress, victimization, and social support) in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth. METHODS: Participants were 248 ethnically diverse LGBT youth (ages 16-20 years at baseline) from a longitudinal cohort study with six waves over 3.5 years. Baseline questionnaires included demographic variables and a measure of impulsivity, and longitudinal questionnaires included measures of cigarette smoking (status and average number of cigarettes smoked daily), LGBT-based victimization, psychological distress, and perceived social support. Analyses were conducted with hierarchical linear modeling. RESULTS: Males had higher odds of smoking and smoking rate than females, but females' smoking rate increased more rapidly over time. Psychological distress was associated with higher odds of smoking and smoking rate at the same wave, and it predicted smoking rate at the subsequent wave. LGBT victimization was associated with higher odds of smoking at the same wave and predicted smoking rate at the subsequent wave. Finally, significant other support predicted higher odds of smoking and smoking rate at the subsequent wave, but family support was negatively correlated with smoking rate at the same wave. CONCLUSIONS: There are several viable avenues for the development of smoking prevention interventions for LGBT youth. To optimize the efficacy of prevention strategies, we must consider experiences with victimization, the impact of psychological distress, and optimizing support from families and romantic partners.