MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405711368 · doi:10.1136/tc-2024-059007

Pre-post implementation policy support for warnings on cigarette filters in Canada among adults who smoke cigarettes

2024· article· en· W4405711368 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily E Hackworth, Samantha Petillo, Yanwen Sun, Dèsirée Vidaña‐Pérez, Crawford Moodie, Jeff Niederdeppe, David Hammond, James F. Thrasher

Bibliographic record

VenueTobacco Control · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineSmokeEnvironmental healthQuit smokingTobacco controlNicotineSmoking preventionCohortDemographyAdvertisingSmoking cessationPublic healthBusinessEngineeringNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Canada has become the first country in the world to require warnings to be displayed on cigarette sticks. Tobacco companies were given a transition period, from 30 April to 31 July 2024 to ensure that all king size cigarettes sold in the country included warnings on the filter of each cigarette stick. Warnings on the filter of regular size cigarettes will be implemented from April 2025. METHODS: We used an online panel provider to recruit an open cohort of adults in Canada who smoked factory-made or roll-your-own cigarettes. Seven waves of data were collected at 3-month intervals between February 2023 to August 2024, with 10 521 observations across 4310 participants. Participants were asked about support for the inclusion of warnings on cigarette filters, accompanied by an image of one of the six prescribed warnings (eg, 'Cigarettes damage your organs'). Smoking behaviours and sociodemographic characteristics were also queried. RESULTS: Generalised estimated equations were used to estimate support at each wave. At W1 (February 2023, prior to the policy announcement), 25% of participants reported supporting printed health messages on cigarette sticks, significantly increasing to 27% by W7 (August 2024, at the end of the implementation transition period). Participants were more likely to support the policy if they used other nicotine/tobacco products, roll-your-own cigarettes, had a recent quit attempt, intended to quit, or had higher risk perception of smoking harms, and less likely if they were older, female, white or reported greater reactance to warnings on cigarette packs. CONCLUSION: Just as increased support has been found for a range of tobacco control policies post-implementation, we found increased support for warnings on cigarettes during the transition period. However, support for this policy among people who smoke remains low. Other countries considering implementing this policy may consider these findings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTobacco ControlSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207