A Machine Learning Approach Reveals Distinct Predictors of Vaping Dependence for Adolescent Daily and Non-Daily Vapers in the COVID-19 Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2016, there has been a substantial rise in e-cigarette (vaping) dependence among young people. In this prospective cohort study, we aimed to identify the different predictors of vaping dependence over 3 months among adolescents who were baseline daily and non-daily vapers. We recruited ever-vaping Canadian residents aged 16–25 years on social media platforms and asked them to complete a baseline survey in November 2020. A validated vaping dependence score (0–23) summing up their responses to nine questions was calculated at the 3-month follow-up survey. Separate lasso regression models were developed to identify predictors of higher 3-month vaping dependence score among baseline daily and non-daily vapers. Of the 1172 participants, 643 (54.9%) were daily vapers with a mean age of 19.6 ± 2.6 years and 76.4% (n = 895) of them being female. The two models achieved adequate predictive performance. Place of last vape purchase, number of days a pod lasts, and the frequency of nicotine-containing vaping were the most important predictors for dependence among daily vapers, while race, sexual orientation and reporting treatment for heart disease were the most important predictors in non-daily vapers. These findings have implications for vaping control policies that target adolescents at different stages of vape use.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".