Support for and likely impacts of endgame measures in the Smokefree Aotearoa Action Plan: findings from the 2020–2021 International Tobacco Control New Zealand (EASE) surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: In February 2024, the Aotearoa New Zealand Government repealed legislation to mandate very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs), greatly reduce the number of tobacco retailers and disallow sale of tobacco products to people born after 2008 (smokefree generation). We investigated acceptability and likely impacts of these measures among people who smoke or who recently (≤2 years) quit smoking. METHOD: We analysed data from 1,230 participants from Wave 3 (conducted in late 2020 and early 2021) and 615 participants from Wave 3.5 (conducted in June/July 2021) of the New Zealand arm of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Policy Evaluation Project. Data were weighted to represent the national population of people who smoke and who recently quit smoking. RESULTS: Support (excluding "Don't know" responses) was 82.7% (95% confidence interval 77.9, 86.6) for a smokefree generation, 75.0% (95% CI 71.4, 78.3) for mandated VLNCs and 35.2% (95% CI 31.7, 38.9) for retailer reduction. Support was mostly similar by ethnicity, gender, age and evidence of financial hardship, but was higher among people who had recently quit smoking. Around half of the participants who smoked anticipated quitting completely, switching to vaping or cutting down the amount they smoke if mandated VLNCs or substantial retailer reductions were introduced. If VLNCs were mandated, 19% of people who smoked stated they would carry on smoking like they do now and find a way to get the cigarettes or tobacco they want to smoke. CONCLUSION: Support for and anticipated actions in response to the smokefree legislation measures call into question the Government's decision to repeal them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".