Drinking Before Going to Licensed Premises: An Event‐Level Analysis of Predrinking, Alcohol Consumption, and Adverse Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research in the United States and the United Kingdom indicates that drinking before going out (commonly called "predrinking") is common among young people and associated with increased harm. On the basis of Swiss data, this study investigates differences in alcohol consumption and adverse or risky outcomes for evenings when persons consumed alcohol before going to a licensed premise (i.e., predrinking), drank on-premise only, or drank off-premise only. METHODS: Using the recently developed Internet-based cell phone-optimized assessment technique (ICAT), alcohol consumption and drinking location were assessed at 6 time points (5 pm to the next morning) on Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays over 5 consecutive weeks by means of participants' cell phones. Overall, 7,828 assessments provided by 183 young adults (53.0% women, mean age [SD] = 23.1 [3.1]) on 1,441 evenings were analyzed by means of cluster-adjusted means and proportion tests and of multilevel structural equation models. The extent to which alcohol consumption mediated the association between predrinking and adverse outcomes was also examined. RESULTS: Higher alcohol consumption occurred on evenings with predrinking (7.1 drinks on average) compared with on-premise only (4.2 drinks) and off-premise only (4.3 drinks) evenings. Adverse outcomes occurred more often on evenings with predrinking (with 23.8% of predrinking nights involving at least 1 outcome) than on evenings with on-premise drinking only (13.9%) and off-premise drinking only (12.0%). Predrinking was indirectly associated with adverse outcomes, mediated by larger amounts of alcohol consumed in the evening. CONCLUSIONS: Because of its association with heavier consumption and related adverse outcomes, predrinking, especially combined with on-premise drinking, represents a major target for prevention. Educational interventions as well as structural measures, such as reduction in late-night off-sale opening hours, and staff training in responsible beverage service, are needed to prevent high total consumption and related adverse consequences among young people.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".