A Qualitative Study on Unassisted Smoking Cessation Among Chinese Canadian Immigrants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well-known that majority of smokers worldwide quit smoking without any assistance. This is even more evident among Chinese smokers. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore how Chinese Canadian immigrant men who smoked cigarettes perceived smoking cessation aids and services and how they used any form of the smoking cessation assistance to help them quit smoking. The study was conducted in British Columbia, Canada. Twenty-two Chinese immigrants were recruited by internet advertisement and through connections with local Chinese communities. Ten of the 22 participants were current smokers and the other 12 had quit smoking in the past 5 years. Data were collected using semistructured interviews. Although all participants, including both the ex-smokers and current smokers, had made more than one quit attempt, they rarely used cessation aids or services even after they had immigrated to Canada. The barriers to seeking the cessation assistance were grouped into two categories: practical barriers and cultural barriers. The practical barriers included "Lack of available information on smoking cessation assistance" and "Difficulty in accessing smoking cessation assistance," while cultural barriers included "Denial of physiological addiction to nicotine," "Mistrust in the effectiveness of smoking cessation assistance," "Tendency of self-reliance in solving problems," and "Concern of privacy revelation related to utilization of smoking cessation assistance." The findings revealed Chinese immigrants' unwillingness to use smoking cessation assistance as the result of vulnerability as immigrants and culturally cultivated masculinities of self-control and self-reliance.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".