Smoking Ban in Psychiatric Inpatient Unit: An Iranian Study on the Views and Attitudes of the Mental Health Staff and Psychiatric Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the move to smoke-free mental health inpatient settings is an internationally common and popular trend, these policies are neither implemented nor supported by any national program in Iran. This study investigates the attitude of mental health staff and psychiatric patients toward smoking cessation in 2 psychiatric inpatient units (psychosomatic and adult general psychiatry) in the Taleghani general hospital in Tehran. One hundred and twenty participants of this cross-sectional study consist of 30 mental health staff and 90 psychiatric patients. An eight-item questionnaire was used for collecting information. Both staff and patients expressed a positive attitude towards smoking cessation. Patients favoured the implementation of these policies and expressed a more positive attitude towards the feasibility. Sixty-three percent of patients and 57% of staff were opposed to smoking in the units. Seventy percent of patients reported the smoke-free ban as a feasible policy compared to 45% of staff who did the same. The implementation of the smoke-free policy has more support in both staff and patients than the continuation of smoking in psychiatric units. There is a need for an ongoing education and training for mental health care providers, in order to have a successful implementation of smoke-free policy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".