Substance use initiation: The role of simultaneous polysubstance use
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Simultaneous polysubstance use (SPU) is a common phenomenon, yet little is known about its role in substance use initiation. DESIGN AND METHODS: In the present study, 226 cannabis users completed structured interviews about their substance use history. For each substance ever used, participants provided details of their age of first use, their use in the preceding 30 days and whether they co-administered any other licit or illicit substances the first time they used the substance. RESULTS: For most illicit substances [powder cocaine, crack, amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA; ecstasy), heroin, opium, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), ketamine, psilocybin (magic mushrooms), mescaline, phencyclidine (PCP), peyote and inhalants], results showed that a clear majority of participants (≥75%) reported SPU during their first-ever use of the substance. While SPU was less common on occasions of first use of alcohol, tobacco and cannabis, a high proportion of SPU on occasions of first use of 'harder' drugs could be accounted for by the co-use of alcohol, tobacco and/or cannabis. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Such findings raise the possibility that specific alcohol, tobacco and/or cannabis use episodes might directly contribute to the initiation of new substance use. Understanding the role of SPU on occasions of first use might help better identify risk factors for substance use progression and improve intervention efforts.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it