Reported electronic cigarette use among adolescents in the Niagara region of Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) among adolescents has not been fully described, in particular their motivations for using them and factors associated with use. We sought to evaluate the frequency, motivations and associated factors for e-cigarette use among adolescents in Ontario. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in the Niagara region of Ontario, Canada, involving universal screening of students enrolled in grade 9 in co-operation with the Heart Niagara Inc. Healthy Heart Schools' Program (for the 2013-2014 school year). We used a questionnaire to assess cigarette, e-cigarette and other tobacco use, and self-rated health and stress. We assessed household income using 2011 Canadian census data by matching postal codes to census code. RESULTS: Of 3312 respondents, 2367 answered at least 1 question in the smoking section of the questionnaire (1274 of the 2367 respondents [53.8%] were male, with a mean [SD] age of 14.6 [0.5] yr) and 2292 answered the question about use of e-cigarettes. Most respondents to the questions about use of e-cigarettes (n = 1599, 69.8%) had heard of e-cigarettes, and 380 (23.8%) of these respondents had learned about them from a store sign or display. Use of e-cigarettes was reported by 238 (10.4%) students. Most of the respondents who reported using e-cigarettes (171, 71.9%) tried them because it was "cool/fun/new," whereas 14 (5.8%) reported using them for smoking reduction or cessation. Male sex, recent cigarette or other tobacco use, family members who smoke and friends who smoke were strongly associated with reported e-cigarette use. Reported use of e-cigarettes was associated with self-identified fair/poor health rating (odds ratio [OR] 1.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.0), p < 0.001), high stress level (OR 1.7 (95% CI 1.1-2.7), p < 0.001) and lower mean (33.4 [8.4] × $1000 v. 36.1 [10.7] × $1000, p = 0.001) and median [interquartile range] (26.2 [5.6] × $1000 v. 28.1 [5.7] × $1000) household incomes. INTERPRETATION: Use of e-cigarettes is common among adolescents in the Niagara region and is associated with sociodemographic features. Engaging in seemingly exciting new behaviours appears to be a key motivating factor rather than 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".