Smoking among Romanian adolescents: do the gender differences exist?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A cross-sectional research study was carried out among Romanian adolescents to identify gender differences in beliefs and behaviour regarding smoking. A written survey was conducted among 473 students aged 15-17 years from 5 senior high schools in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. All students filed in a questionnaire which assessed their smoking-related behaviour. The results show that one quarter (24.5%) of the subjects were smokers, a significant differences was noticed, regarding the prevalence of smoking between boys (32.2%) and girls (20.9%). Smoking behaviour served a stronger function for smoking girls to remain slim, while smoking boys had stronger beliefs that smoking helped them to relax. Self-efficacy expectations to handle emotional situations without smoking were significantly lower in smoking girls than in smoking boys. Moreover, in comparison with non-smoking boys, non-smoking girls reported low self-efficacy to maintain their non-smoking status when upset, depressed or nervous, and a stronger intention to start smoking than non-smoking boys. Non-smoking boys reported stronger pressures to smoke from their peers in the same school year. These findings have several implications for smoking prevention and reduction activities in Romania. First, smoking prevention programs should strengthen positive attitudes towards non-smoking, resistance against peer influences and enhance self-efficacy beliefs. Second, smoking prevention and reduction activities should address the fact that smoking is seen by Romanian girls as a way to control their weight, and as a way to relax by boys, and thus need to offer other healthier alternatives to realize these outcomes. Additionally, they need to address strategies to cope with emotional situations, in particular for girls.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".