Does a relationship exist between body weight, concerns about weight, and smoking among adolescents? An integration of the literature with an emphasis on gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been speculated that body weight and concern about body weight are important factors in initiation of tobacco use among adolescents, particularly females. An examination of studies that have explored these relationships can provide important information on possible underlying mechanisms that could be used for prevention interventions. This review summarizes recent studies examining weight concerns and youth smoking, with a focus on gender differences. These studies were integrated with the few studies that have examined the relationship between actual body weight and smoking among adolescents. A total of 55 primary research articles met inclusion criteria for the review. Of these, 19 studies assessed the relationship between body weight and smoking, and 50 studies addressed weight concerns and smoking. Some evidence indicated a positive relationship between smoking and body weight among adolescents, although not all studies found a positive association. In terms of the relationship between weight concerns and adolescent smoking, the amount of evidence supporting a positive association differed depending on the dimension of weight concern considered, with the strongest evidence for dieting behaviors. For dieting behaviors, disordered eating symptoms, and some aspects of general weight concerns, the positive relationship with smoking was more consistent among female adolescents than among male adolescents. Possible explanations for these findings are discussed, and priorities for future research are identified.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".