Prevalence of flavored cigarettes and e-cigarettes<i> in Uruguay</i>: findings from the Wave 5 of the ITC Uruguay survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Uruguay has implemented strong tobacco control policies over the years which has resulted in decreased tobacco consumption. However, there is little information about flavored cigarettes and on electronic cigarettes (ECs). EC sales are banned in Uruguay. The purpose of this study is to evaluate consumption of these products. Methods Data is from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Uruguay Wave 5 smokers aged 18 and older in five cities. The sample size was 1,428 smokers. Results The minimum age of onset of smoking was 5 years old and 96% of smokers started smoking before the age of 25. Two out of three (68.6%) smokers chose their cigarette brand because of the taste. 72.5% have tried flavored (menthol) cigarettes, and1.3% currently smoking menthol brands. Younger age (94% aged 18-24) and smokers with higher education (84% high, 74% medium, 61% low) have tried menthol cigarettes associated with. Awareness of ECs was 56% among the smokers, but it is higher among smokers aged 18-24 (62%) and smokers with higher education (81%). Among the smokers who had heard of e-cigarettes. 12.8% had tried once (higher under age 24 (24%) and higher among smokers with high education level (20%)). Among the smokers, 1.3% using EC daily and 1.9% using EC weekly. Conclusions Taste is a very important factor for Uruguayan smokers. Almost all young smokers have tried menthol cigarettes. ECs use is also on the rise, mainly among young peopleand people with higher education. There is a need for monitoring flavored cigarettes and EC consumptionto defining new regulations for them.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".