MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132736123 · doi:10.1080/14622200701540846

Smoking and its association with disability in chronic conditions: Results from the Canadian Community and Health Survey 2.1

2007· article· en· W2132736123 on OpenAlexaffabout
Norbert Schmitz, Johannes Kruse, Joachim Kügler

Bibliographic record

VenueNicotine & Tobacco Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas College
FundersU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsLibrary scienceAcademic communityCommunity healthMedicineSociologyMedia studiesPsychologyPublic healthGerontologyFamily medicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the association between smoking, chronic conditions, and short-term disability in a representative community sample. The analysis was based on data from 115,548 respondents from the Canadian Community and Health Survey (CCHS-2.1), a nationally representative survey. Smoking status, chronic conditions, and short-term disability were assessed by self-report. The population prevalence of current smoking was 23.5%. More than half of the subjects (51.9%) reported at least one chronic condition. Although a large number of subjects with chronic conditions had stopped smoking (33.7%), a high prevalence of current smoking remained (22.9%) among subjects with chronic conditions. Disability was markedly elevated in smokers with chronic medical conditions. Subjects with chronic conditions who smoked were more likely to report disability days than subjects with chronic conditions who never smoked (27.2% and 20.5%, respectively). Our results suggest that smoking is associated with short-term disability in subjects with chronic health problems.

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 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)0.018
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 score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.002
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNicotine & Tobacco ResearchSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207