Hookah use prevalence, predictors, and perceptions among Canadian youth: findings from the 2012/2013 Youth Smoking Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Few national surveys currently assess hookah smoking among youth. This study describes the prevalence, patterns of use, and perceptions about hookah in a nationally representative survey of Canadian grades 9-12 students. METHODS: The Youth Smoking Survey 2012/2013 was administered to 27,404 Canadian grades 9-12 students attending schools in nine Canadian provinces representing 96 % of Canadian population. Relevant dichotomous outcomes included ever use, use in the last 30 days, and the belief that hookah use is less harmful than cigarette smoking. Covariates included smoking status, sex, grade, province of residence, race/ethnicity, and amount of weekly spending money. Logistic regression models were used to examine: covariates related to the odds of ever and last-30-day hookah use; covariates related to perceptions about the harms of hookah smoking; the extent to which perceptions were associated with odds of hookah use; and whether survey year (2010/2011 or 2012/2013) was associated with hookah use, and marginal effects were calculated. RESULTS: In Canada, 5.4 % of students in grades 9-12 currently use hookah and 14.3 % report ever using hookah. In 2012/2013, students had significantly higher odds of using hookah compared to students in 2010/2011 (OR 1.5, 95 % CI 1.2, 2.1). About half of hookah users (51 %) used flavored hookah. Students who believed that hookah use was less harmful than cigarette smoking had significantly higher odds of current hookah use (OR 2.6, 95 % CI 1.9, 3.5), as did students who reported higher amounts of weekly spending money. Current smokers had an 18 % higher predicted probability of currently using hookah compared to non-smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Hookah use among youth is of growing concern in Canada. Findings can be used to inform policy development related to youth hookah smoking.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".