The Association Between Household Smoking Restrictions and Smoking Abstinence: Does Age Matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim: The purpose of this study is to explore how effective household smoking restrictions (HSRs) are in different age groups in predicting smoking abstinence. Methods: The study analysed the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) cycle, 3.1. Smoking abstinence was defined as individuals who reported to not have smoked greater than 100 cigarettes ( n = 1 024 578) and were selected for this analysis. Important covariates include sex, age, education and immigrant status. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between smoking household restrictions and smoking abstinence when taking covariates into consideration. Results: Individuals who implemented HSRs reported to be abstinent from smoking at 12% compared to those with no HSRs at 0.7%. When adjusted for covariates of interest, the odds ratio (OR) for smoking abstinence was 1.43 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04, 1.97; P < .026). It was found that age was a strong predictor of smoking abstinence particularly in youths at 3.11 (95% CI: 1.65, 5.84; P < .001) and young adults at 1.92 (95% CI: 1.44, 1.92; P < .001). Conclusion: It is suggested that HSRs is an important anti-tobacco socialisation tool in youths and young adults. Individuals living in a home with HSRs may internalise behavioural norms against the initiation or continuation of smoking.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".