Cigarette smoking in patients with obsessive compulsive disorder: a report from the International College of Obsessive Compulsive Spectrum Disorders (ICOCS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) showed a lower prevalence of cigarette smoking compared to other psychiatric disorders in previous and recent reports. We assessed the prevalence and clinical correlates of the phenomenon in an international sample of 504 OCD patients recruited through the International College of Obsessive Compulsive Spectrum Disorders (ICOCS) network. Cigarette smoking showed a cross-sectional prevalence of 24.4% in the sample, with significant differences across countries. Females were more represented among smoking patients (16% vs 7%; p<.001). Patients with comorbid Tourette's syndrome (p<.05) and tic disorder (p<.05) were also more represented among smoking subjects. Former smokers reported a higher number of suicide attempts (p<.05). We found a lower cross-sectional prevalence of smoking among OCD patients compared to findings from previous studies in patients with other psychiatric disorders but higher compared to previous and more recent OCD studies. Geographic differences were found and smoking was more common in females and comorbid Tourette's syndrome/tic disorder.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".