MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128710081 · doi:10.3126/jcmc.v4i1.10843

Knowledge on health effects and practices of smoking among the smokers in the Eastern Terai Region of Nepal

2014· article· en· W2128710081 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samyog Uprety, IS Poudel, S Bhattarai, Anup Ghimire, Neeti Singh, M Poudel, RB Rayamajhi, PK Pokharel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chitwan Medical College · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePovertyQuarter (Canadian coin)RecreationEnvironmental healthDemographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tobacco smoking kills more than five million people a year worldwide. According to Nepal Adolescent and Young Adult (NAYA) Survey 2000, about one quarter of young boys and one in 10 girls have smoked tobacco at some time or the other. A cross sectional study was done in Jalthal & Maheshpur Village Development Committee of Jhapa district using simple random sampling method among 200 participants. Interview methods with semi-structured questionnaires were used as tool for data collection. The objective of this study was to identify the reason of initiation of smoking, explore the pattern of smoking and to assess the health knowledge among the smokers regarding effect of smoking. It was reported that, 63% of them started to smoke at the age of 10-19 years. Most smokers were male, illiterate, unemployed and fell below the poverty line. Though most of the smokers knew the ill effect due to smoking; habituation was the main reason for not being able to stop smoking and 10% of them smoked for recreation. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jcmc.v4i1.10843 Journal of Chitwan Medical College 2014; 4(1): 22-25

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chitwan Medical CollegeSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207