Prevalence of menthol cigarette use among adults who smoke from the United States by census division and demographic subgroup, 2002–2020: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Targeted marketing of menthol cigarettes in the US influences disparities in the prevalence of menthol smoking. There has been no analysis of sub-national data documenting differences in use across demographic subgroups. This study estimated trends in the prevalence of menthol use among adults who smoke in the nine US census divisions by sex, age, and race/ethnicity from 2002 to 2020. METHODS: Data from 12 waves of the US ITC Survey were used to estimate the prevalence of menthol cigarette use across census divisions and demographic subgroups using multilevel regression and post-stratification (n = 12,020). Multilevel logistic regression was used to predict the prevalence of menthol cigarette use in 72 cross-classified groups of adults who smoke defined by sex, age, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status; division-level effects were fit with a random intercept. Predicted prevalence was weighted by the total number of adults who smoke in each cross-classified group and aggregated to divisions within demographic subgroup. Estimates were validated against the Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (TUS-CPS). RESULTS: Overall modeled prevalence of menthol cigarette use was similar to TUS-CPS estimates. Prevalence among adults who smoke increased in each division from 2002 to 2020. By 2020, prevalence was highest in the Middle (46.3%) and South Atlantic (42.7%) and lowest in the Pacific (25.9%) and Mountain (24.2%) divisions. Prevalence was higher among adults aged 18-29 (vs. 50+) and females (vs. males). Prevalence among non-Hispanic Black people exceeded 80% in the Middle Atlantic, East North Central, West North Central, and South Atlantic in all years and varied most among Hispanic people in 2020 (Pacific: 26.5%, New England: 55.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Significant geographic variation in the prevalence of menthol cigarette use among adults who smoke suggests the proposed US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) menthol cigarette ban will exert differential public health benefits and challenges across geographic and demographic subgroups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".