Awareness and interest in IQOS heated tobacco products among youth in Canada, England and the USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Heated tobacco products (HTPs), such as IQOS, have been introduced in a growing number of international markets. However, little is known about perceptions of HTP products among youth. METHODS: Data are from wave 1 of the International Tobacco Control Youth Tobacco and E-cigarette Survey (2017), a web-based cohort survey of people aged 16-19 years from Canada, England and the USA. Respondents (n=12 064) were shown an image of IQOS and asked about their awareness, interest in trying and susceptibility to trying the product. Youth awareness, interest in trying and susceptibility to trying IQOS were analysed using descriptive statistics, and logistic regression models were used to examine correlates of these outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 7.0% of youth reported awareness of IQOS (England=5.6%, Canada=6.4% and USA=9.1%) and 38.6% expressed interest in trying the product (England=41.8%, Canada=33.0% and USA=40.9%). Within each country, all key outcomes varied by smoking status: greater proportions of youth who were currently smoking or had a history of smoking reported being aware of, interested in trying and susceptible to trying IQOS. Interest and susceptibility to trying IQOS were associated with male sex, current tobacco use and current e-cigarette use. Across all countries, susceptibility to trying IQOS (25.1%) was higher than for tobacco cigarettes (19.3%), but lower than for e-cigarettes (29.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of HTPs, such as IQOS, is emerging among youth in Canada, England and the USA. Interest in trying these products is very high among smokers, but also present among non-smokers.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".