MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404337997 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v26i5.7356

Non-Smoke Tobacco Consumption in India: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

2024· article· en· W4404337997 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deepak Kumar Verma, Leena Sharad Shimpi, Saifuddin Ahmad, Shweta Yadav

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmokeConsumption (sociology)Agricultural economicsEnvironmental healthTobacco smokeEnvironmental scienceBusinessToxicologyEconomicsWaste managementMedicineEngineeringBiologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the economic and social impacts of non-smoke tobacco consumption in India and compares them with the tax revenue generated by the government from this industry. Non-smoke tobacco products, such as chewing tobacco and pan masala, are associated with various health and environmental problems, such as oral cancer and littering. The study uses the concept of externalities to analyse the costs and benefits of non-smoke tobacco consumption for the society and the government. Based on available data and assumptions, the study estimates the expenditure on oral cancer treatment and cleanliness, and the revenue from direct and indirect taxes on non-smoke tobacco products. The study finds that the government collects more revenue than it spends on mitigating the negative externalities of non-smoke tobacco consumption, but the social costs are still significant. The study suggests that the government should implement more effective tobacco taxation and control policies to reduce the consumption and harm of non-smoke tobacco products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207