Youth exposure to smoking in the home and in cars: how often does it happen and what do youth think about it?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Little is known about what youth think about restricting smoking in their homes or in cars. The present study characterises the frequency of youth being exposed to smoking in their homes and cars, and the beliefs that youth have about restricting people from smoking around youth in those locations. METHODS: Data from the 2004 Youth Smoking Survey (YSS) were used to examine youth exposure to smoking and beliefs about smoking in the home and car among 29,243 Canadian youth in grades 5-9. Logistic regression models were conducted to examine if being exposed to smoking at home or in the car were associated with the beliefs youth have about either smoking around children at home or smoking around children in cars. RESULTS: In 2004, 23.1% of youth in grades 5-9 were exposed to smoking in their home on a daily or almost daily basis, 26.3% were exposed to smoking while travelling in a car at least once in the previous week. The majority of youth reported that they do not think smoking should be allowed around children at home (90.6%) or in cars (90.2%). Males were more likely than females to report that smoking should not be allowed around children at home (OR 1.38) or in cars (OR 1.39). Youth living in a house where someone smokes inside daily were more likely to report that smoking should not be allowed around children at home (OR 1.20) or in cars (OR 1.21). Youth living in a house where the rules do not prevent people from smoking inside were also more likely to report that smoking should not be allowed around children at home (OR 2.07) or in cars (OR 1.76). Youth who have ridden in a car with someone who was smoking cigarettes in the past 7 days were more likely to report that smoking should not be allowed around children in cars (OR 1.73). CONCLUSIONS: It is common for Canadian youth to be exposed to SHS in their homes or while in cars on a frequent basis even though the vast majority of youth do not think smoking should be allowed around children in those locations. This new evidence suggests that programs and policies designed to prevent individuals from smoking around youth in these locations should be a public health priority.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".