MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prevalence of smokeless tobacco consumption among women of rural Telangana

2021· article· en· W3202059708 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Murali Lingala, Sneha Simon, Bhagath, Kavitha

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmokeless tobaccoMedicineEnvironmental healthTobacco useChewing tobaccoConsumption (sociology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Cross-sectional studyPeer pressurePopulationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Tobacco kills approximately 1 million people annually in India and is responsible for almost half of all cancers in men and quarter of all cancers in women. Smokeless tobacco (SLT) is one such form that is culturally and socially acceptable by women especially in rural India. The study was aimed to estimate the prevalence of smokeless tobacco consumption among women, prevalence of exposure to second hand smoke and to determine the factors associated with it.Methods: A community based cross sectional study was done among 190 women in the rural field practice area of department of community medicine of Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal during the period of October 2019 to December 2019. Data was collected using simple random sampling. A semi structured questionnaire was prepared with the help of global adult tobacco survey proforma. The data was analyzed using statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) 20.00.Results: Prevalence of smokeless tobacco consumption was 57% and the most common form of tobacco being consumed was tobacco with pan (40.3%). The prevalence of exposure to second hand smoke at home was 61%. The most common reason for initiation was peer pressure. High prevalence of consumption of smokeless tobacco was seen in unemployed and illiterate women.Conclusions: The prevalence of smokeless tobacco consumption is higher among women in this study and this indicates the lack of awareness and the need for better strategies to reduce the burden.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Community Medicine and Public HealthSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207