MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022578228 · doi:10.1177/009145090903600308

Tracking Trends of Alcohol, Illicit Drugs and Tobacco through Morbidity Data

2009· article· en· W2022578228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jane A. Buxton, Andrew W. Tu, Tim Stockwell

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Drug Problems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthMedicineRespondentPublic healthIllicit drugPsychiatryDrugLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite various national and provincial tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drug surveys in Canada, tracking trends and patterns of use is difficult. These surveys often target specific populations and are prone to sampling or respondent bias. This article describes a feasibility study to provide alcohol-, illicit drug- and tobacco-related morbidity using hospital separation data. Hospital episodes for diseases and conditions wholly or partially attributable to alcohol, illicit drugs, and tobacco by health authority, age group, sex, and specific ICD-10 codes for British Columbia (BC) were obtained. The most responsible diagnosis statistics were combined with aetiologic fractions for each ICD-10 code to estimate the total burden of substance use by health authority. Hospital admissions attributable to alcohol and tobacco each cause approximately 3 and 5 times respectively, that attributable to illicit drugs. The ongoing analysis of morbidity data will be used to inform the health authorities, and to assist policy makers in creating and evaluating policies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Drug ProblemsSame topicAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsFrench-language works237,207