Childhood predictors of smoking in adolescence: a follow-up study of Montreal schoolchildren
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The factors that cause children to become smokers in adolescence remain unclear. Although parental smoking and peer pressure may play a role, physiological factors such as lung volume have also been identified. METHODS: To investigate these and other possible childhood predictors of teenage smoking, we gathered follow-up data on 191 Montréal schoolchildren, aged 5-12 years (average 9.2 yr) when first examined. At an average age of 13.0 years, they answered further questions on their health and smoking behaviour and provided a second set of spirometric measurements. RESULTS: At the second survey, 80% of the children had entered high school and 44% had become smokers. Reaching puberty between the surveys was the most significant determinant of becoming a smoker: 56.4% of the 124 children postpubertal at the second survey had taken up smoking, versus 17.9% of the 67 who were still prepubertal (p = 0.001). We found salivary cotinine level, a measure of uptake of environmental tobacco smoke, to be an independent predictor of becoming a teenage smoker; even after adjustment for sex, socioeconomic status of parents, a crowding index, and the numbers at home of siblings, adult smokers and cigarettes smoked, it remained significant for both groups: postpubertal (odds ratio [OR] 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.0) and prepubertal (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0- 4.5). The influence of forced vital capacity was marginally significant only in the postpubertal group (OR 5.0, 95% CI 0.88-28.3). INTERPRETATION: The proportion of nicotine absorbed from that available in environmental tobacco smoke during childhood is associated with subsequent smoking in adolescence. The more efficient absorption of nicotine seen in some children may be related to physiological factors such as lung capacity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".