Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Mahidol University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Adisak Plitponkarnpim.
Annals of global health | 2018
Ratchaneewan Sinitkul; Chathaya Wongrathanandha; Somkiat Siriruttanapruk; Adisak Plitponkarnpim; Richard J. Maude; Emma L. Marczylo
Background: There is increasing evidence of a link between environmental pollution and preventable diseases in developing countries, including Thailand. Economic development has generated several types of pollution that can affect population health. While these environmental health effects can be observed throughout life, pregnant women and children represent particularly vulnerable and sensitive groups. Methods: The published epidemiological literature investigating environmental chemical exposure in Thai children was reviewed, highlighting those that investigated associations between exposure and subsequent health outcomes. Results: The majority of the Thai epidemiological studies on environmental health in children were cross-sectional in design, with some demonstrating associations between exposure and outcome. The three main types of chemical exposure in Thai children were pesticides, heavy metals, and air pollution, which resulted from agricultural activities in countryside areas, industrial zones (both registered and unregistered establishments), mining, and traffic in inner cities. Major health outcomes included detrimental effects on cognitive function and cancer risk. Pesticide exposure was focused on, but not limited to, agricultural areas. The success of the Thai environmental policy to introduce lead–free petrol can be demonstrated by the decline of mean blood lead levels in children, particularly in urban areas. However, unregistered lead-related factories and smelters act as hidden sources. In addition, there is increasing concern, but little acknowledgement, about the effects of chronic arsenic exposure related to mining. Lastly, air pollution remains a problem in both dense city populations due to traffic and in rural areas due to contamination of indoor air and house dust with heavy metals, endotoxins and other allergens. Conclusions: The increasing number of published articles demonstrates an improved awareness of children’s environmental health in Thailand. Chemical hazards, including the improper use of pesticides, environmental contamination with heavy metals (lead and arsenic), and air pollution in inner cities and indoor air, continue to be growing issues.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
Injury Prevention | 2016
Chatchai Im-arom; Chaiwat Rerkswattavorn; Adisak Plitponkarnpim
Background Several studies reveal that corporal punishment does not facilitate moral internalisation and it has been implicated in the aetiology of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In Thai society, corporal punishment seems to be an acceptable tool for discipline in child rearing. The previous study for children in child care centres of urban poor communities in Bangkok found that the prevalence of corporal punishment by spanking is 83.4% of all children. Methods An anti-corporal punishment program was developed. It consists of two group conferences. The first group conference was done in the community using the educational package (VDO multimedia, leaflet, and role play). Then 1 month later, a group conference was done, aimed to empower all parents by reviewing all knowledge, and sharing opinions, their stories. The program was implemented in parents and their children in 4 child centres in Bangkok (n = 351). The intervention group is those from 2 child centres (n = 200) and the control group is those from another 2 child centres (n = 151). Three measurements were done for pre and post intervention; punishment incidences using Punishment Incidence Questionnaire (PIQ) modified from Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, injury incidences using Injury Record Form, and child behaviour and emotion using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results 52.4% of parents use the severe corporal punishment (SCP) as discipline strategies, 79.5% using minor corporal punishment (MCP), 89.7% using non-violent punishment (NVP), and 90.3% using psychological aggressive punishment (PAP). SCP and PAP in intervention group was significantly more than control group. Our anti-corporal punishment program was shown effectiveness in reducing parental use of all violent discipline strategies (20% reduction in SCP, 7% in PAP, and 12% in MCP). Conclusions This study demonstrated that our anti-corporal punishment program decreased the corporal punishment in the urban poor communities.
