Impact of smoking policy on the respiratory health of food and beverage servers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether workplace smoking policy was associated with respiratory health effects among food and beverage servers. METHODS: Data were obtained from a postal survey of hospitality workers. The participation rate for the questionnaire was 73.9% of those contacted. Current smokers were excluded from the analysis. Adjustment for differences between groups in age, gender, ex-smoker versus never smoker status, home exposure environmental tobacco smoke, childhood asthma, mail versus telephone questionnaire, and hours worked per week was done using logistic regression. A subset of 88 nonsmokers underwent laboratory evaluation, including spirometry and hair nicotine analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of irritant and respiratory symptoms among 383 nonsmokers was consistently higher among the participants from premises where smoking was permitted without restrictions on the workplace. In comparison with those from facilities where smoking was prohibited, the highest adjusted odds ratios (OR) were for chronic phlegm for those working where smoking was permitted (OR 8.5 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.4-30.0] or where there were partial smoking restrictions (OR 5.7 95% CI 1.7-19.4). Lung function was not reduced apart from the ratio between forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity, which was lower for workers from facilities where smoking was permitted. Hair nicotine levels were lowest for workers from facilities where smoking was prohibited. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that occupational exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, determined through smoking policies, can adversely affect the respiratory health of nonsmokers who work in the food and beverage service industry.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".