Use and acquisition of nicotine replacement therapy products among underaged adolescents after deregulation of the sales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Limited information is available on the use and acquisition of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products in minors after deregulation of the sales. In Finland, deregulation releasing the NRT products for general sale took place in 2006. The sale is prohibited to those under the age of 18 years. We examine underaged adolescents' use, acquisition, and awareness of NRT products after the deregulation. METHODS: Nationwide mailed survey of 12- to 18-year olds (N = 5,840, response rate 61%) was conducted in 2007. The main outcomes were ever use of NRT, acquisition of NRT products in different locations (retail outlet, family member, friend, health care personnel, and pharmacy), and awareness of NRT. Eighteen-year olds were analyzed as a comparison group as they were at legal age to buy the products. RESULTS: Among 14-year olds, 2% of boys and 2% of girls had used NRT. The corresponding figures for 16-year olds were 7% and 5%, respectively, and for 18-year olds 10% and 8%, respectively. Few 12-year olds had used NRT. Over a quarter of 12-year-old girls and 15% of boys did not know what NRT products were. Awareness increased with age. Of 12- to 16-year-old NRT users, 79% were daily smokers, 10% had smoked >50 but not daily, 10% had smoked <50, and 2% were never-smokers. The underaged NRT users acquired the products mainly not only from friends (42%) but also from retail outlets (13%). CONCLUSIONS: One year after deregulation, NRT use among minors is uncommon. Also misuse seems rare. NRT products are sold to minors from retail outlets despite sales ban. However, the underaged NRT users acquired the products mainly from friends.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".