MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998596830 · doi:10.3109/03014460.2012.710249

Alcohol consumption in Mozambique: Results from a national survey including primary and surrogate respondents

2012· article· en· W1998596830 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jorge Pires, Patrícia Padrão, Albertino Damasceno, Carla Silva‐Matos, Nuno Lunet

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Human Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProxy (statistics)Consumption (sociology)Alcohol consumptionEnvironmental healthQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicineDemographyAlcoholGeographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Data on the correspondence between information on alcohol consumption obtained from household members directly interviewed and those evaluated through surrogate respondents are scarce in developing countries. AIM: To estimate alcohol consumption in Mozambique and to compare the information self-reported by subjects directly interviewed with data provided by surrogate respondents referring to household members that were absent during interview. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A representative sample of 20 033 Mozambicans aged 25-64 years was evaluated in 2003 as part of a national household survey. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a structured questionnaire assessing socio-demographic and behavioural factors (12 902 participants were directly interviewed and for 7238 data were provided by surrogate respondents). RESULTS: Nearly a quarter of women and half the men were current drinkers, of which about 60% drank 1-2 days/week and more than 75% reported traditional beverages as the most frequently consumed. No meaningful differences were observed between the estimates obtained using only data reported directly by the participants and when surrogate reports were also considered. CONCLUSION: Alcohol consumption was frequent in Mozambique, especially consumption of traditional beverages. Proxy respondents provided valid information on alcohol intake, which may be used to improve the efficiency of household surveys in this setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.379
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.078 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Human BiologySame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207