Characteristics of Former Heavy Drinkers: Results from a Natural History of Drinking General Population Survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the factors associated with reduction from heavy drinking among three groups: current abstinent, moderate, and reduced drinkers. A random-digit-dialing telephone survey was conducted of 3,006 respondents in Ontario, Canada. Of these, 470 respondents (46% female) met criteria as former heavy drinkers (99 abstinent; 237 moderate; 134 reduced but not moderate drinkers). Quantitative and qualitative questions were used to explore current and past drinking, use of treatment, and reasons for change. Qualitative items were tape-recorded and transcribed. Respondents in the abstinent group had more severe problems prior to resolution as compared with those in the moderate group. Reduced drinkers displayed a prior alcohol severity at a level between these two other groups. The most common reasons for change in all groups were new responsibilities, maturation, and health concerns. This study serves as a useful adjunct to other natural-history research, exploring the reasons for change in a representative sample of former heavy drinkers.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it