Retailer Compliance as a Predictor of Youth Smoking Participant and Consumption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ninety percent of smokers report having their first whole cigarette before the age of 19. Policies, such as youth access laws, are essential to prevent youth from becoming future smokers. In Canada, the Tobacco Act prohibits retailers from furnishing tobacco products to individuals under the age of 18. These laws can only be effective when retailers comply with them. This paper investigates the effect of retailer compliance on youth smoking behavior. METHODS: Data on individual smoking behavior in conjunction with provincial retailer compliance rates and cigarette prices for the years 1999-2005 were employed to examine the effects of retailer compliance on youth smoking participation and consumption. RESULTS: Both price and retailer compliance were significant predictors of smoking participation. A large portion of participants endorsed obtaining their cigarettes through social means. Price elasticity of demand for the overall sample was estimated to be -0.54. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous literature, our results found that retailer compliance is an essential component to the successful implementation of youth access laws. Given that youth access laws and retailer compliance did not quell social access to cigarettes, there is an apparent need within schools and communities to reduce the social sale of tobacco products.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".