Awareness and knowledge of the effects of smoking on oral health, and smoking cessation motivation among high school students in Jakarta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The number of adolescent smokers is rising in Indonesia.Awareness and knowledge about the nega tive effects of smoking could prevent adolescents from smoking.Motivation to stop smoking might predict the likeli hood of smoking cessation.Objectives: The aim of this study was to discover the level of Jakarta adolescents' awareness and knowledge of the effects of smoking on oral health, and smoking cessation motivation.Material and methods: An online questionnairebased crosssectional study was conducted in Jakarta using convenient sampling methods among 552 high school students.The relationship between the variables was inves tigated using simple logistic regression and Spearman's rho correlation.Results: Most of the participants (n = 493, 89.3%) were aware that smoking jeopardizes oral health.About 324 (65.72%) participants had little knowledge about the specific effects of smoking on oral health.Female partici pants, never smoking participants, smoking for a short period, or those having the intention to quit smoking were all more likely to be aware than their counterparts.With respect to knowledge, participants who never smoked displayed higher knowledge levels than their peers.The level of smoking cessation motivation was insufficient, with 22 (43.1%)respondents reporting the motivation to quit.No statistically significant difference was found between motivation scores with awareness and knowledge.There were linear correlations between the motivation scores and cessation duration, smoking period, and the intention to quit smoking.Conclusions: Incorporating oral health education in smoking prevention program among adolescents is recom mended.However, more tailored approach is required to help this group of population, who already is nicotine addicted, to stop smoking.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".