Does smoke-free Ireland have more smoking inside the home and less in pubs than the United Kingdom? Findings from the international tobacco control policy evaluation project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In March 2004, Ireland implemented comprehensive smoke-free regulations. Some were concerned this would cause pub patrons to move their smoking and drinking from inside pubs to inside homes. This article aims to assess whether nationwide smoke-free policies are associated with more smoking or drinking inside the home. METHODS: Participants were 1917 adult smokers (> 18-years old) from Ireland (n = 582), Scotland (n = 507) and the rest of the United Kingdom (n = 828), which did not have smoke-free laws at the time of the interview, who completed a random digit-dialed telephone survey in February to March 2006. The percentage of alcoholic drinks consumed in the home versus pubs was compared by country as well as the percentage of daily cigarette consumption occurring in the home after work. RESULTS: Irish respondents reported a significantly lower percentage of alcoholic drinks consumed in the home compared to Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom, and cigarette consumption in the home was comparable in all three regions. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking and drinking in the home was not greater in smoke-free Ireland than in the United Kingdom, where there was not a smoke-free law at the time of the survey. These findings add further support to the enactment of comprehensive smoke-free laws, as called for in the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".