Changes in Cigarette Smoking, Purchase Patterns, and Cessation-Related Behaviors Among Low-Income Smokers in New York State From 2002 to 2005
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study characterized longitudinal changes in cigarette smoking and purchase and cessation patterns among low-income smokers in New York State. DESIGN: Longitudinal tobacco use surveys were conducted in 2002 and 2005. Responses from the 2002 and 2005 surveys were compared among participants who completed both surveys. SETTING: New York State. PARTICIPANTS: Adult low-income smokers (n = 274) were recruited from the Department of Social Services office in Erie County, New York, in 2002 and recontacted in 2005. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: These included cigarette smoking, cessation and purchase behaviors, awareness and use of the Quitline, and participation in tobacco industry promotions during the 3-year follow-up period. RESULTS: During the 3-year follow-up period, 37 participants (13.5%) stopped smoking. Among smokers, the average number of daily cigarettes smoked decreased from 16.1 to 13.7 cigarettes (P < .01). There were significant increases in the proportion of smokers who reported that they had ever used a stop smoking medication (26.6% to 51.9%), had ever heard of the Quitline (32.5% to 73.0%), or had ever called the Quitline (4.2% to 11.0%). There was an increase in the use of tobacco industry coupons (41.1% to 59.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that state and local tobacco control policies and programs are being increasingly utilized by this population; however, tobacco company price promotions are also being increasingly used, offsetting the public health benefit of the tobacco control policies and programs in this low-income population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".