MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366000037 · doi:10.18502/ijph.v52i4.12447

Evaluation of Smoking and Associated Factors in Turkey

2023· article· en· W4366000037 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mustafa Çakır

Bibliographic record

VenueIranian Journal of Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthTurkishMedicineMicrodata (statistics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Secondhand smokeDemographyGeographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the use of tobacco products and associated factors in Turkey based on the Turkey Health Survey 2019 data conducted by the Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK). Method: The study was designed as a cross-sectional research. It was conducted by utilizing the "Turkey Health Survey 2019" microdata set from the Turkish Statistical Institute. The data of 17,084 people aged 15 years and over were evaluated. Results: The study examined the data of 17,084 individuals aged ≥15 years surveyed by the TUIK. 27.2% of the participants used tobacco products every day, 3.4% used occasionally, and 54.2% never used them. Furthermore, 15.8% of the participants were exposed to secondhand smoking for ≥1 hour every day, while 7% were exposed to secondhand smoking for <1 hour every day in a closed environment. The reasons for starting to use tobacco products were friend influence for 33.4% of the participants, wannabe for 25.2%, and curiosity for 18.6%. Conclusion: More than a quarter of people aged ≥15 years in Turkey smoke every day. The frequency of using tobacco products every day, the daily number of cigarettes smoked, and the frequency of exposure to tobacco products in closed areas were higher among men.

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)0.012
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIranian Journal of Public HealthSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207