The Public Health Implications of the Use and Misuse of Tobacco among the Aboriginals in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tobacco smoking among the Aboriginal populations is a major public health issue in Canada. It remains a major contributory risk factor to the poor health status as well as years of potential life lost seen among the indigenous people. The use of tobacco has a spiritual importance to the people as a means of making connection to the Creator, but unfortunately tobacco smoking has taken a recreational aspect which has little or no connection with Aboriginal spirituality. The non-traditional use of tobacco is believed by the Elders to be disrespectful to the Aboriginal culture and traditional way of life. There is an increase in rate of use of smokeless tobacco as well as smoking of tobacco among the youth with increase in percentage among females. There are socioeconomic implications as well as adverse health effects of the misuse of tobacco on the Aboriginal people that need to be addressed. The healthcare professionals have a unique role in helping patients to reduce tobacco use within the community through programs that are culturally sensitive and relevant. Successful strategies requires general support from the community and it is very important that some of that support comes from community leaders, including spiritual, professional, administrative and elected policy makers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".