Access to the Internet among drinkers, smokers and illicit drug users: Is it a barrier to the provision of interventions on the World Wide Web?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Expanding Internet-based interventions for substance use will have little benefit if heavy substance users are unlikely to have Internet access. This paper explored whether access to the Internet was a potential barrier to the provision of services for smokers, drinkers and illicit drug users. METHODS: As part of a general population telephone survey of adults in Ontario, Canada, respondents were asked about their use of different drugs and also about their use of the Internet. RESULTS: Pack-a-day smokers were less likely (48%) to have home Internet access than non-smokers (69%), and current drinkers (73%) were more likely to have home access than abstainers (50%). These relationships remained true even after controlling for demographic characteristics. Internet access was less clearly associated with cannabis or cocaine use. CONCLUSIONS: Even though there is variation in access among smokers, drinkers and illicit drug users, the World Wide Web remains an excellent opportunity to potentially provide services for substance abusers who might never access treatment in person because, in absolute terms, the majority of substance abusers do use the Internet.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".