Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This study found the STASH intervention was feasible and acceptable within the context of Scottish secondary schools, and made recommendations for a full-scale evaluation.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Kirstin R Mitchell 1,*, Carrie Purcell 1, Ross Forsyth 1, Sarah Barry 2, Rachael Hunter 3, Sharon A Simpson 1, Lisa McDaid 1, Lawrie Elliot 4, Mark McCann 1, Kirsty Wetherall 5, Chiara Broccatelli 1, Julia V Bailey 3, Laurence Moore 1

1 Medical Research Council/Chief Scientist Office Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
2 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, UK
3 Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
4 Department of Nursing and Community Health, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
5 Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
* Corresponding author Email: Kirstin.mitchell@glasgow.ac.uk

Declared competing interests of authors: Sharon A Simpson is a member of the Health Technology Assessment Clinical Trials Committee (2016–20). Laurence Moore is a scientific adviser to Evidence to Impact Ltd (Bristol, UK) (formerly Decipher Impact Ltd, Bristol, UK).

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document