Perceived acceptability of female smoking in China: findings from waves 1 to 3 of the ITC China Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Female smoking prevalence in China is very low but may rise with increased tobacco marketing towards women and changing norms. However, little is known about current perceptions of women smoking in China. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to examine smokers' and non-smokers' perceived acceptability of female smoking and how it changed over time in China. METHODS: Data come from Waves 1 to 3 (2006-2009) of the International Tobacco Control China Survey, a face-to-face cohort survey of approximately 800 adult smokers and 200 non-smokers in each of seven cities in mainland China. RESULTS: At Wave 3 (2009), about 38% of smokers and 9% of non-smokers agreed that female smoking is acceptable with women being almost twice as likely to do so as men (67% vs 36% and 11% vs 6%, respectively). In addition to women, smokers who were younger and had more positive perceptions of smoking in general were more likely to say that female smoking is acceptable. This perception significantly increased from Wave 1 (2006) to Wave 3 (2009), as did the perception that smoking is a sign of sophistication, but other general perceptions of smoking did not significantly change between 2006 and 2009. CONCLUSIONS: Norms against female smoking appear to remain strong in China, but female smoking may be becoming more acceptable. It is important to monitor these perceptions to prevent a rise in female smoking prevalence along with an increase in tobacco-related death and disease among women in China.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".