Awareness and use of heated tobacco products among adult smokers in six European countries: findings from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The study assessed awareness and use of heated tobacco products (HTPs) and factors that influenced these issues among cigarette smokers from six European countries in 2016 (Wave 1) and 2018 (Wave 2). METHODS: A survey was conducted among a nationally representative sample of cigarette smokers aged 18 years or older from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Spain in 2016 (N = 6011) and 2018 (N = 6027; 53% of smokers from the previous wave were retained, regardless of smoking status and dropouts were replaced by a replenishment sample of smokers). Data were collected through face-to-face interviews. Estimates were produced using weighted data. The study presents the cross-sectional results. RESULTS: Awareness of HTPs increased from 8% to 17% between the two waves. At Wave 1, 1.1% of the smokers declared having used HTPs at least once during their lifetime; and at Wave 2, this increased to 1.9% (around 1% or less in four countries, except for Greece and Romania where it was around 4%). Factors associated with HTPs use among those who had ever heard about these products at Wave 1 were country of residence, being a daily cigarette smoker and ever use of electronic cigarettes. At Wave 2, ever use of HTPs was significantly higher among those who had tried to quit smoking combustible cigarettes in the last 12 months, had tried electronic cigarettes during lifetime and perceived HTPs as less dangerous than combustible cigarettes; the country of residence was also associated with HTPs use. CONCLUSION: This study offers insights into the behaviours and perceptions of European adult smokers regarding HTPs, an important emerging issue in the field of tobacco control.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".