MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risky single‐occasion drinking: bingeing is not bingeing

2010· review· en· W1702312446 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionSuicide preventionMedicineOccupational safety and healthNarrativeEnvironmental healthBinge drinkingPsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To review the concept of binge drinking as a measure of risky single occasion drinking (RSOD), to illustrate its differential impact on selected health outcomes and to identify research gaps. METHODS: Narrative literature review with focus on conceptual and methodological differences, trajectories of RSOD and effects of RSOD on fetal outcomes, coronary heart disease (CHD) and injuries. RESULTS: Effects ascribed commonly to RSOD may often be the effects of an undifferentiated mixture of risky single occasions and regular heavy volume drinking, constituted by frequent, successive RSOD. This leads to the problem that additional risks due to RSOD are mis-specified and remain unidentified or underestimated in some cases, such as for injuries or CHD, but are probably overstated for some chronic consequences or for effects of maternal drinking on newborns. CONCLUSION: A stronger focus should be placed upon methods that can differentiate the effects of RSOD from those due to frequent occasions of heavy drinking that result in heavy volume drinking.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.259 · 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