Childhood Adversity Interacts With Adult Stressful Events to Predict Reduced Likelihood of Smoking Cessation Among Women but Not Men
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has documented important sex differences in associations between early stress, stress sensitization, and psychiatric outcomes. The current study investigated whether sex differences in stress sensitization extended to cigarette smoking cessation. Data were analyzed from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (Waves 1 and 2), selecting for current daily and nondaily smokers at Wave 1 (daily smokers: n = 3,499 women, 3,055 men; nondaily smokers: n = 451 women, 501 men). Three-way interactions among sex, childhood adversity, and past-year stressful life events were modeled in the prediction of smoking cessation. Among women, stressful life events were more strongly related to lower likelihood of smoking cessation for those with a history of childhood adversity than those without. This relationship was not found among men. The stress sensitization model may be applicable to women with regard to smoking cessation, supporting further exploration of stress sensitization as a prevention and clinical target for smoking cessation.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it