The Relationship of Home Smoking Bans to the Physical and Mental Health of Smokers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to examine whether the adoption of home smoking bans is associated with the physical and mental health of smokers. Two potential pathways that link home smoking bans to smoker's health are analyzed. The first argues that home smoking bans are positively related to physical health by encouraging smoking cessation while reducing daily cigarette consumption. The second suggests that home smoking bans have a negative relationship to smokers' mental health by increasing marginalization and social isolation. METHODS: Data on 28,887 Canadian smokers were analyzed from the Canadian Community Health Survey, a nationally representative sample of Canadians adults. Logistic regression models analyzed the impact of home smoking bans on subjective assessments of smoker's physical and mental health. Separate analyses were conducted on daily and occasional smokers, and additional analyses tested interactions between the presence of a home smoking ban and key socioeconomic (gender and low household income) and structural (dwelling ownership, living alone, and dwelling type) covariates. RESULTS: Home smoking bans were not associated with smoker's physical health and were positively associated with smokers' mental health. These findings were consistent for daily smokers and occasional smokers. No significant interactions between smoking bans and socioeconomic or structural covariates were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings are considered with respect to the internal and external constraints that shape smoker's behavior, particularly the influence of social norms around environmental tobacco smoke exposure and good citizenship and the role of family relationships. The implications of study findings are considered with respect to public health policy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".