Secondhand tobacco smoke exposure among children under 5 years old: questionnaires versus cotinine biomarkers: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cotinine is the gold standard to estimate prevalence of secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) exposure, and assay limit of detection (LOD) cut-points are typically used regardless of age. Our aim was to compare the concordance between mother-reported SHS exposure and serum cotinine categorising children as exposed with the assay LOD or age-specific cut-points. DESIGN: Data from the Health Outcomes and Measures of the Environment (HOME) Study, a prospective pregnancy and birth cohort. SETTING: Hospital or participants' homes. PARTICIPANTS: 389 pregnant women aged 18 years and older, between 13 and 19 weeks of gestation, living in a five-county region of the Cincinnati, Ohio metropolitan area, and with follow-up on their children at birth and ages 12, 24, 36 and 48 months. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Children's serum cotinine, mother-reported active smoking and SHS exposure were available at birth and during follow-up visits. We used Cohen's kappa index to assess concordance between maternal self-report and child's serum cotinine concentrations. We estimated optimal age-specific cut-points, their sensitivity-specificity and positive-negative predictive values with receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Self-reported exposure and cotinine data were available for 280 women who gave birth to singleton child. When applying the assay LOD (0.015 ng/mL), concordance between maternal report and serum cotinine, without accounting for age, was below 0.23 at all times. When using age-specific cut-points (12 months: 0.11 ng/mL; 24 months: 0.08 ng/mL; 36 months: 0.05 ng/mL and 48 months: 0.04 ng/mL), concordance improved, being low at 12 months (0.39), moderate at 24 and 36 months (0.47 and 0.43) and high at 48 months (0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Concordance between mother-reported SHS exposure among children under 5 years and serum cotinine improved considerably after applying the cohort-specific and age-specific cut-points. Future studies are necessary to verify these results.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".