Prospective study of frequent heavy alcohol use and the risk of major depression in the canadian general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of persistent alcohol consumption on the risks of major and minor depression. A retrospective cohort study design was used. The data was derived from a large scale longitudinal national health study (Canadian National Population Health Survey). Depression status was evaluated by using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Short Form (CIDI-SF) for major depression. Subjects who did not have major depression at baseline were classified into groups according to the persistence of alcohol consumption during the follow-up period. The incidence of major depression in each group was calculated in men and in women separately and were stratified by age. The same procedures were repeated for minor depression. Women who reported having 5+ drinks on one occasion at least once a month were at an elevated risk of major depression. The same pattern was not observed among men in this analysis. However, no difference was found between the groups in terms of the incidence of minor depression. Frequent heavy alcohol use may be a causal factor for major depression among women. Reducing the frequency and quantities of alcohol consumption may offer an opportunity for prevention of major depression among women.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".