Smokers’ cognitive and behavioural reactions during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory illness, and smoking adversely impacts the respiratory and immune systems; this confluence may therefore incentivize smokers to quit. The present study, conducted in four high-income countries during the first global wave of COVID-19, examined the association between COVID-19 and: (1) thoughts about quitting smoking; (2) changes in smoking (quit attempt, reduced or increased smoking, or no change); and (3) factors related to a positive change (making a quit attempt or reducing smoking) based on an adapted framework of the Health Belief Model. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 6870 adult smokers participating in the Wave 3 (2020) ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey conducted in Australia, Canada, England, and United States (US). These four countries had varying responses to the pandemic by governments and public health, ranging from advising voluntary social distancing to implementing national and subnational staged lockdowns. Considering these varying responses, and the differences in the number of confirmed cases and deaths (greatest in England and the US and lowest in Australia), smoking behaviours related to COVID-19 may have differed between countries. Other factors that may be related to changes in smoking because of COVID-19 were also explored (e.g., sociodemographics, nicotine dependence, perceptions about personal and general risks of smoking on COVID-19). Regression analyses were conducted on weighted data. RESULTS: Overall, 46.7% of smokers reported thinking about quitting because of COVID-19, which differed by country (p<0.001): England highest (50.9%) and Australia lowest (37.6%). Thinking about quitting smoking because of COVID-19 was more frequent among: females, ethnic minorities, those with financial stress, current vapers, less dependent smokers (non-daily and fewer cigarettes smoked/day), those with greater concern about personal susceptibility of infection, and those who believe COVID-19 is more severe for smokers. Smoking behaviour changes due to COVID-19 were: 1.1% attempted to quit, 14.2% reduced smoking, and 14.6% increased smoking (70.2% reported no change). Positive behaviour change (tried to quit/reduced smoking) was reported by 15.5% of smokers, which differed by country (p = 0.02), where Australia had significantly lower rates than the other three countries. A positive behavioural smoking change was more likely among smokers with: lower dependence, greater concern about personal susceptibility to infection, and believing that COVID-19 is more severe for smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Though nearly half of smokers reported thinking about quitting because of COVID-19, the vast majority did not change their smoking behaviour. Smokers were more likely to try and quit or reduce their smoking if they had greater concern about susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 related to smoking. Smokers in Australia were least likely to reduce or try to quit smoking, which could be related to the significantly lower impact of COVID-19 during the early phase of the pandemic relative to the other countries.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".