Beliefs about the cardiovascular benefits of drinking wine in the adult population of Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: to explore beliefs about the cardiovascular benefits of drinking wine in the Ontario population. DESIGN: secondary analysis of data from a provincial survey of adults. PARTICIPANTS: Ontarians aged 18 or older (n = 606) from Ontario living in households and participating in a telephone survey. MEASURES: responses to questions concerning beliefs that wine drinking may reduce the risk of heart disease. Self-reports of age, gender, quantity and frequency of wine drinking, drinking problems, and existence of a diagnosis of heart disease. FINDINGS: a majority of respondents believed that wine drinking reduces heart disease. Almost all (87.6%) said that drinking one or two drinks a day would reduce heart disease. Belief in the health benefits of wine drinking was more common among men, more frequent drinkers, and wine drinkers. CONCLUSIONS: beliefs in the health benefits of wine drinking is common amongst Ontario adults and is consistent with many recommendations by health authorities. The study should be replicated with larger samples in a variety of countries with different drinking patterns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".