MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100007957

- 1-The Impact of Workplace Smoking Regulations on the Smoking Behavior of Canadian Workers

2013· article· en· W7100007957 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBivariate analysisPoisson regressionSmoking banWork (physics)SmokeTobacco smokeTelephone surveySurvey data collection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the impact of workplace smoking regulations on the probability that a worker is a current smoker, on the amount working smokers smoke, and examines the relationship between workplace regulations, exposure to second-hand smoke outside the home and at work, and smoking behaviour. Telephone survey data from 40,267 Canadian workers aged 20 or above interviewed in 2003-06 as part of the Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey is used to conduct the analysis. Smoking regulations are classified as fully restricted, restricted to designated areas, allowed in certain areas, and no restrictions, and are used as exogenous determinants of whether individuals smokes, of exposure to second-hand smoke at work and more generally outside the home, and of how much smokers smoke. Smoking, quantity smoked, and the joint probabilities of smoking and quantity smoked, of smoking and exposure at work or outside the home, and of quantity smoked and exposure at work or outside the home, are estimated using a variety of econometric specifications, including probit, logit, multiple regression, poisson and negative binomial regression, bivariate and instrumental variables probits, simultaneous equation, and hurdle models. All models indicate that workplace smoking regulations have substantial impacts on the probability of smoking, quantity smoked, and exposure. Simultaneous models indicate that smoking affects general exposure to secondhand smoke outside the home, but not exposure at work, that when workplace smoking policies are controlled for, general exposure adds no explanatory value to models that estimate smoking. However, workplace policies effects may be working through an effect on exposure.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics→French-language works237,207→