Les Jeux de Hasard et D'argent Chez Les Adolescents et Adolescentes en Difficulté
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of studies have established that adolescents are attracted to games of chance and gambling, and have confirmed that excessive gambling is not a phenomenon of adulthood alone. In Quebec, the proportion of high school students who are struggling with gambling problems is estimated at 2.6% (Ladouceur, Boudreault, Jacques, & Vitaro, 1999). So far, few researchers have studied adolescent populations that are at greater risk of developing gambling problems. The present study was carried out among 104 adolescents in difficulty, ranging in age from 12 to 19 and served by the Centre jeunesse de Québec. It assesses the prevalence of excessive gambling and the problems associated with it. The results indicate that 92.3% of adolescents had bet at least once during the previous year and 40.4% bet every week. The prevalence of excessive gambling was established at 7.7%. Girls were found to gamble as frequently as boys and to experience as many gambling problems. In addition, habitual gambling was found to be associated with the consumption of psychotropic substances, delinquent behaviour and school absenteeism. The discussion puts the results obtained in perspective and emphasizes the need for establishing gambling prevention programs among at-risk youth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".