MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Smoking cessation counselling practices among Québec optometrists: evaluating beliefs, practices, barriers and needs

2012· article· en· W1544722803 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Experimental Optometry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSmoking cessationPsychological interventionFamily medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that cigarette smoking is a well known risk factor for many ocular diseases, very little data exist regarding optometrists' interventions in smoking cessation counselling with their patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the practices, perceptions and educational needs of Québec optometrists regarding smoking cessation counselling. METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire pertaining to smoking cessation counselling practices was mailed to 600 optometrists licensed in Québec. RESULTS: The response rate was 51 per cent. The majority (90 per cent) of respondents (n = 288) reported having the required knowledge of ocular diseases related to smoking. Most respondents recognised that optometrists should ask their patients if they smoke (73 per cent), should advise their smoking patients to stop smoking (65 per cent) and should be cognisant of the resources available that can support patients in their efforts to quit smoking (65 per cent). Few responders asked their patients on a regular basis if they indeed smoked (16 per cent) or advised them to stop, if such was the case (29 per cent). Moreover, only eight per cent of respondents knew the resources toward which they should direct their patients who wish to stop smoking. Only eight per cent of respondents perceived themselves as being competent to offer counselling. For 72 per cent of the respondents, the main obstacle to smoking cessation counselling was the lack of knowledge about counselling. Approximately half (48 per cent) of respondents are interested in acquiring competencies in smoking cessation counselling. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of the present study, optometrists in Québec are well aware of the effects of smoking on ocular health and the importance of educating their patients; however, they might not possess the required skills to assist their patients in quitting smoking. Because they have not received sufficient training, optometrists in Québec remain an untapped resource in tobacco cessation counselling.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it