Can young adult smoking status be predicted from concern about body weight and self-reported BMI among adolescents? Results from a ten-year cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We sought to evaluate the relationship between the perception of being overweight and BMI (body mass index) when participants were adolescents and their cigarette smoking as young adults. In 1993, 1598 students in grade 6 from 107 schools in Scarborough (Ontario) completed the base line questionnaire. Of these, 1,543, 1,455 and 1,254 responded at follow-ups in grades 8 and 11, and as young adults (in 2002), respectively. Reported smoking behavior was used to categorize people as current and never smokers. Self-reported height and weight were used to calculate BMI. Girls who thought themselves overweight in grades 8 and 11 were more likely to be smoking as young adults (odds ratios of 1.778 and 1.627, respectively). Boys with higher self-reported BMIs in grades 8 and 11 were more likely to be smokers as young adults (odds ratios of 1.115 and 1.095, respectively). These findings provide evidence of the longitudinal effect of perception of being overweight as an adolescent on smoking as a young adult and suggest possible ways of averting smoking behavior.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".