Susceptibility to Smoking among Non-smoking East-Asian Youth: A Multilevel Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective - Among non-smoking youth in east-Asia, to estimate the extent to which susceptibility to smoking is associated with between-context differences (schools and classes) and to identify factors at school, class and individual levels that influence individual susceptibility to smoking. Methods - Cross-sectional data from the Global Youth Tobacco Survey conducted in Cambodia (2002), Laos (2003) and Vietnam (2003) are used to conduct multilevel analyses that account for the nesting of students in classes and classes in schools. The outcome variable is smoking susceptibility, defined as the absence of a firm decision not to smoke and measured using a validated algorithm. Explanatory variables include school and class level influences (current tobacco use prevalence in school, exposure to anti-smoking media messages, exposure to tobacco billboard advertising and school prevention) and individual level influences (parent and friends smoking behaviour, knowledge of the harmful effects of and exposure to second-hand smoke at home, age, sex and pocket income). Results - Multilevel analyses indicate that about 10 percent of the variation in smoking susceptibility is associated with school and class differences. Teens who have parents or friends who smoke, who are exposed to second-hand smoke at home and those who have access to pocket income are found to be more susceptible while better knowledge of the harmful effects of second-hand smoke appears to diminish susceptibility to smoking. For girls only, billboard tobacco advertising increases the risk for susceptibility and school prevention decreases risk while for boys only, attendance to schools with higher prevalence of tobacco use increases risk for susceptibility and anti-smoking media messages decreases risk. Conclusions - This study highlights a number of modifiable factors associated with smoking susceptibility and identifies interactions between teen sex and several factors associated with the susceptibility to smoking. This finding provides support to the call to move beyond genderblind tobacco control policies.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".