MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123588645 · doi:10.1093/her/cym003

The pit and the pendulum: the impact on teen smokers of including a designated smoking area in school tobacco control policy

2007· article· en· W2123588645 on OpenAlex
Lynne Baillie, Chris Y. Lovato, E. Taylor, M. Rutherford, Michelle L. Smith

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Island UniversityBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTobacco controlTobacco useEnvironmental healthSmoking preventionMedicinePsychologySmoking cessationPublic healthNursingPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirty per cent of school districts in British Columbia do not ban smoking outright on school grounds, and in several instances, smoking is permitted in smoking pits, regardless of school district policy. While there is evidence to suggest that enforcing a tobacco-free environment for students does reduce adolescent smoking rates, the concomitant safety and discipline problems it creates for school staff and administration are demanding and complex, and may override concerns regarding student smoking. This study uses a qualitative approach to explore the meanings that students place on tobacco control policy and the impact that these meanings have on their own smoking behaviours. We found that students were surprised and concerned that smoking was permitted on school property and that it negatively impacted their own tobacco prevention/control/cessation attempts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.372 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it