Second‐Hand Smoke Exposure in Canada: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Association with Respiratory And Cardiovascular Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of the present study were to estimate the prevalence of second-hand smoke exposure in Canada, to identify sociodemographic risk factors for second-hand smoke exposure, and to examine the relationship between second-hand smoke exposure and respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. METHODS: Data from the 2000/2001 Statistics Canada Canadian Community Health Survey (n=130,880, aged 12 years or older) were analyzed. Second-hand smoke exposure was based on self-report within the past month. The presence of chronic health conditions was also based on self-report. Because ex-smokers would be expected a priori to have poorer health than never-smokers, the analysis was stratified by previous smoking status. RESULTS: Approximately 25% of never-smokers and 30% of ex-smokers self-reported recent second-hand smoke exposure. The following factors were identified as risk factors for second-hand smoke exposure: men; residences in Quebec, Atlantic Canada and the Territories; younger ages; nonimmigrant status; low education and income levels; social assistance receipt; and households without children younger than 12 years of age. After controlling for potential confounders, both never- and ex-smokers exposed to second-hand smoke had significantly higher odds of self-reporting asthma (20% to 30%) and chronic bronchitis (50%) than those not exposed to second-hand smoke. Among ex-smokers, those exposed to second-hand smoke also had significantly higher odds of self-reporting hypertension (20%) than those not exposed to second-hand smoke. No associations were observed between second-hand smoke exposure and emphysema or heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported recent second-hand smoke exposure in Canada in 2000/2001 was high, and was associated with asthma, chronic bronchitis and hypertension in never- and ex-smokers. Potential causal associations and public health implications warrant additional research.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".