Initiation or cessation: what keeps the prevalence of smoking higher in Quebec than in the rest of Canada?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We compared smoking initiation and cessation in Quebec versus the rest of Canada as possible underpinnings of the continued higher cigarette smoking prevalence in Quebec. METHODS: Data were drawn from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS). We compared average and sex-stratified prevalence estimates of (1) current cigarette smoking in persons aged 15 years and older; (2) past-year initiation of cigarette smoking in those aged 12 to 17 and 18 to 24 years; and (3) past-year cessation in adults aged 25 years and older in Quebec versus the other nine Canadian provinces in each two-year CCHS cycle from 2007/08 to 2017/18. RESULTS: The prevalence of current smoking decreased from 25% to 18% among adults aged 15 years and older in Quebec from 2007/08 to 2017/18, and from 22% to 16% in the rest of Canada. Initiation among those aged 12 to 17 years decreased from 9% to 5% in Quebec, and from 7% to 3% in the rest of Canada. Neither initiation among people aged 18 to 24 (at 6% and 7%, respectively) nor cessation among adults aged 25 and older (approximately 8%) changed over time in Quebec or in the rest of Canada. In each two-year CCHS cycle, past-year initiation among those 12 to 17 years of age was consistently higher in Quebec than in the rest of Canada, but there were no substantial or sustained differences in initiation among people aged 18 to 24 or in past-year cessation. Findings were similar when stratified by sex. CONCLUSION: Higher levels of smoking initiation among youth aged 12 to 17 years could be a proximal underpinning of the continuing higher prevalence of smoking in Quebec versus the rest of Canada.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".