Reasons to Quit Smoking by Social Status in Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Recent studies report social disparities in reasons to quit smoking among adults, but it is unclear if this observation also pertains to adolescents who smoke. The objective of this study was to describe social disparities in reasons to quit smoking in adolescents. Method: Data on indicators of social status, cigarette smoking and the Adolescent Reasons For Quitting (ARFQ) scale were collected in mailed self-report questionnaires completed by 1,242 grade 11 students in 2010–11. The associations between each of ten social status indicators and two of the ARFQ subscales were investigated among current adolescents who smoke (n=190; 45% male; mean (sd) age =16.8(0.5)) in logistic regression analyses controlling for age, sex and number of years since first puff. Results: Sixty-three percent of adolescents who smoke rated health as an extremely or very important reason to quit smoking; only 28% endorsed social disapproval. None of the indicators of social status were associated with health as a reason to quit. Participants whose mothers were employed were less likely to endorse social disapproval as a reason to quit smoking (OR (95% CI) = 0.38 (0.15–0.96)). Conclusions: Adolescents who smoke, regardless of social status, endorse health as an important reason to quit smoking, but fewer thought that social disapproval was important. There are few social disparities in reasons to quit in adolescents. Introduction: Des études récentes rapportent que, parmi les adultes, une des raisons pour cesser de fumer est les inégalités sociales, mais ce n'est pas clair si cette observation se rapporte également aux adolescents qui fument. L'objectif de cette étude était de décrire les inégalités sociales comme raisons pour cesser de fumer parmi les adolescents. Méthode: Des données sur des indicateurs du statut social, le tabagisme et l’échelle sur les raisons pour cesser de fumer (Adolescent Reasons For Quitting [ARFQ]) ont été recueillies par l'entremise d'un questionnaire postal auto-rapporté et complété par 1 242 élèves de niveau 11 en 2010–11. Les associations entre chacun des dix indicateurs de statut social et deux sous-échelles de l'ARFQ ont été examinées parmi les adolescents qui fument (n=190; 45% hommes; moyenne (ÉT) age = 16,8 (0,5)). Des analyses de régression logistique contrôlant pour l’âge, le sexe et le nombre d'années écoulées depuis la première bouffée ont été réalisées. Résultats: Soixante-trois pourcents des adolescents qui fument ont évalué la santé comme une raison extrêmement ou très importante pour cesser de fumer; seulement 28% accordait de l'importance à la désapprobation sociale. Aucun des indicateurs de statut social était associé à la santé comme raison pour cesser de fumer. Il était moins probable que les participants dont la mère travaillait accordent de l'importance à la désapprobation sociale (rapport de cotes (95% IC) = 0,38 (0,15–0,96)). Conclusions: Les adolescents qui fument, sans égard au statut social, accorde de l'importance à la santé comme raison pour cesser de fumer, mais peu juge la désapprobation sociale importante. Il y a peu d'inégalités sociales dans les raisons pour cesser de fumer parmi les adolescents.
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 | 0.000 | 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".