How stakeholders’ perceive the effects of future Scottish tobacco control on smoking inequalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Despite significant declines in smoking prevalence in Scotland, 34% of people living in the most deprived areas smoked in 2014, compared to 9% of those living in the least deprived areas. Few studies have examined tobacco control’s effects on smoking inequalities and their findings are inconsistent. Some studies found that certain tobacco control policies have had the unforeseen effect of increasing social exclusion and stigmatization among deprived smokers. This issue is challenging for the Scottish government, which aims to design policies to reduce smoking prevalence and smoking inequalities. To better understand how tobacco control affects inequalities, we sought the perspectives of those involved in its design. We asked: How do tobacco control stakeholders perceive future Scottish tobacco control policies as affecting smoking inequalities? Methods We conducted a qualitative thematic document analysis of 92 Scottish government consultations completed by tobacco control stakeholders in 2014. We analysed 12 questions that addressed future tobacco control (i.e. smoke-free NHS grounds and children’s outdoor areas) and their effects on inequalities. Results Many stakeholders agreed that further de-normalised smoking with national smoke-free policies was key to reducing smoking inequalities. A few stakeholders were concerned of the stigmatizing and exclusionary effects of smoke-free policies on deprived groups. They suggested that community groups be involved in future policy design to reduce inequalities. Conclusions Scarce research examines tobacco control stakeholders’ perspectives although they are critical in policy design. Results suggest that their perceptions of the effects of tobacco control on smoking inequalities vary, with many failing to consider tobacco control’s potential effects on increases in inequalities. Researchers and stakeholders need to consider how smoking inequalities are perceived to design future equitable tobacco control. Key messages: We provide evidence on stakeholders’ perception of tobacco control policies as affecting smoking inequalities to focus knowledge translation on the importance of developing equitable tobacco control. Stakeholders perceptions of the effects of tobacco control on smoking inequalities vary, with many failing to consider its potential effects on increasing inequalities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".