Couple dynamics during women's tobacco reduction in pregnancy and postpartum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smoking cessation during pregnancy is often temporary; many women relapse postpartum. To develop strategies for supporting successful long-term smoking cessation, we conducted a qualitative study to explore the influence of couple interactions on women's tobacco reduction within the context of pregnancy and the postpartum period. A total of 28 women who quit or reduced smoking for pregnancy and their partners were interviewed following delivery and at 3-6 months postpartum. Open-ended, individual interviews elicited the challenges posed by the women's tobacco reduction and how their partners influenced their cessation efforts. The use of constant comparative analytic strategies focusing on women's processes, experiences, and responses revealed that unquestioned expectations for pregnant women's cessation created the social context of compelled tobacco reduction. Women's engagement in tobacco reduction in this context fundamentally altered couples' previously established tobacco-related routines. The intensity of these changes varied depending on the couples' established interaction patterns with respect to tobacco (i.e., disengaged, conflictual, or accommodating) and was a source of conflict for some couples. The findings offer novel ways to understand smoking cessation during pregnancy that provide new directions for research and for tailoring smoking cessation interventions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".