Relationships Between Smoking Behaviors and Cotinine Levels Among Two American Indian Populations With Distinct Smoking Patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Smoking prevalence, cigarettes per day (CPD), and lung cancer incidence differ between Northern Plains (NP) and Southwest (SW) American Indian populations. We used cotinine as a biomarker of tobacco smoke exposure to biochemically characterize NP and SW smokers and nonsmokers and to investigate factors associated with variation in tobacco exposure. Methods: American Indians (N = 636) were recruited from two different tribal populations (NP and SW) as part of a study conducted as part of the Collaborative to Improve Native Cancer Outcomes P50 project. For each participant, a questionnaire assessed smoking status, CPD, second-hand smoke exposure, and traditional ceremonial tobacco use; plasma and/or salivary cotinine was measured. Results: Cotinine levels were (mean ± 95% confidence interval [CI]) 81.6 ± 14.1 and 21.3 ± 7.3 ng/ml among NP smokers and non-mokers, respectively, and 44.8 ± 14.4 and 9.8 ± 5.8 ng/ml among SW smokers and nonsmokers, respectively. Cotinine levels correlated with CPD in both populations (p < .0001). Cotinine ≥15 ng/ml was measured in 73.4% of NP smokers and 47.8% of SW smokers and in 19.0% of NP nonsmokers and 10.9% of SW nonsmokers. Ceremonial traditional tobacco use was associated with higher cotinine among NP smokers only (p = 0.004). Second-hand smoke exposure was associated with higher cotinine among NP non-smokers (P < 0.02). More secondhand smoke exposure was associated with smoking more CPD in both populations (p = 0.03-0.29). Linear regression modeling mirrored these findings. Conclusions: High prevalence of smoking in the Northern Plains and high cotinine levels among nonsmokers in both regions highlights the tribal populations' risk for tobacco-related disease. Implications: There is a high prevalence of smoking in Northern Plains American Indians. Among Northern Plains and Southwest nonsmokers, relatively high cotinine levels, representative of high tobacco exposure, suggest considerable exposure to second-hand smoke. It is critical to highlight the extent of second-hand smoke exposure among the Northern Plains and Southwest American Indians and to enhance efforts to initiate smoke-free policies in tribal communities, which are not subject to state-level polices.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".