1. WP4 ADPY How does it work? Jón Sigfússon ©ICSRA Reykjavik University

2. 1.Mapping of substance use in local settings 2.Establish local risk and protective factors 3.Create a local basis for: Dialouge between those working on primary prevention Actions if and where needed WP4 - Why is this important?

3. Our results using this methodology

4. The scientific role of research 1.In depth information from analysis of data 2.Publish - Generate peer reviewed papers 3.Science forms the platform for practice

5. The practical role of research 1.Data collections on a long term, regular basis 2.Map status and find risk and protective factors in the local environment 3.Generate descriptive reports a.s.a.p. and deliver information to everyone involved in prevention on the local level / municipalities

6. Four common risk and protective factors Family factors Peer group effect General well being Extracurricular activities, sports

7. Focus on primary prevention

8. Substance use decrease amongst 15-16 year old adolescents

9. ADPY Mapping and analysis.

10. EstoniaFaroe Islands IcelandLatvia LithuaniaNorway RomaniaRussia SerbiaSweden Countries ADPY/YiE 2012/2013 Ten countries

11. Bagrationovsk Drammen Klaipeda Nynäshamn Sovjetsk Participating this winter Arilje Bucharest Kaunas Reykjavik Riga Tallinn Torshavn Vilnius

12. 1.Preparations started in 2010 2.Programme started in 2012 3.Co-ordination meetings in Riga, Tallinn, Vilnius, Kaliningrad and Stockholm 4.Follow-up meetings in Klaipeda, Nynäshamn, Bucharest e.t.c. 5.Continued follow-up meetings next months Timespan of project

13. 1.Youth in Europe – A Drug Prevention Programme October and November 2013. 2.ADPY in February 2013 Data collections

14. Participants ADPY

15. Participants YiE

16. Focus on 15 – 16 year old students All in all over 16 thousand this winter Questionnaires hold around 400 variables. Over 7 million answers in all. Participants

17. Indicators Health status indicators, anxiety, depressive symptoms, physical health status, lifestyle and leisure time activities, local community networks, negative life events and strain, parents and family, peer group economic and psychological issues, studies and school, substance use, values and attitudes, violence and delinquency, and more…

18. 1.Most work procedures according to plan. 2.Pre-meetings, questionnaire agreement, translations, layout (centralized), printing, transportation, school cooperation, data collection e.t.c. 3.Optical scanning for better data quality. The Plan and deviations

19. 1.Sovjetsk work processes, delay of questionnaire delivery and lack of communication jeopardized the project, causing lots of additional work, data merging, data analysis, making of multible reports, e.t.c. 2.No technical reports yet from Sovjetsk Special problems - A

20. 1.Individual numbering for Drammen (ICSRA) 2.Late appointment of co-ordinator from Nynäshamn Special problems - B

21. In May 2013 every community received 1.A descriptive report on substance use status and other indicators 2.Full SPSS dataset for further research and digging into various correlations Delivery of reports and data

22. SO... now we have all this information

23. Daily smoking – comparison between participating municipalities

24. Snuff past 30 days - comparison

25. Water pipe past 30 days - comparison

26. Drunk past 30 days - comparison

27. Drunk past 30 days – Reykjavik 1998 and 2013

29. Where young people drink – all cities

30. Cannabis lifetime - comparison

31. 1.Sleeping pills 2.Amphetamins 3.Ecstacy 4.Sniffing 5.Organic drugs 6.E.t.c. Other substances

32. Debute year of alcohol – city comparison

33. 1.Smoking 2.Cannabis Same for

34. Parents reaction to children getting drunk

35. Caring and warmth and daily smoking

36. Parental monitoring and getting drunk

37. Engagement in sports and substance use

38. Well being in school and getting drunk

39. Conclusions

40. What do we know now? 1.First of all that we want to know more! 2.Reports show “the tip of the iceberg” 3.Practical LOCAL information – status! 4.Risk and protective behaviour supported by earlier evidence!

41. What to do with it? 1.Get the prevention work around facts and address properly 2.Stress the dialogue between all parties 3.Follow up measurements annually or bi- annually at least 4.Learn – adjust and continue

42. Substance abuse decrease amongst 15-16 year old adolescents

43. What is the commitment?

44. Cities for Youth Reykjavik 19th – 20th March 2013