Comparing Drinking Patterns in Finland and Ontario (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comparison is made of drinking patterns in Finland and Ontario (Canada). Respondents in two existing population surveys, the 1996 Joint Nordic Questionnaire and the 1996 Ontario Drug Monitor, were compared on their frequency of alcohol use in the past year, frequency of heavy drinking (6+ on Nordic survey and 5+ in Ontario), and both frequency and typical quantity of beer, wine and liquor consumption in males and females. It appeared that there are fewer nondrinkers and more weekly drinkers in the Finnish sample than in the Ontario sample. Further, both males and females in Ontario consumed 6+ drinks on one occasion more frequently than their Finnish counterparts. However, examination of the patterns of beer, wine and liquor consumption, particularly the distribution of very heavy drinking days (e.g., 12 or more drinks of liquor on one occasion), indicates that there is some evidence for periodic heavy drinking in Finnish males. Contrary to expectations, Canadian and Finnish drinking patterns appeared fairly similar. However, there was some evidence for a higher prevalence of binge drinking by Finnish men as compared with Canadian men.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".