MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cirrhosis mortality in Ontario: effects of alcohol consumption and Alcoholics Anonymous participation

2005· article· en· W2140723491 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert E. Mann, Reginald G. Smart, Brian Rush, Rosely Flam Zalcman, Helen Suurvali

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCirrhosisPer capitaDemographyAlcoholAlcohol consumptionMortality rateMedicineAlcoholics AnonymousConsumption (sociology)Internal medicineEnvironmental healthBiologyPopulationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: We test the hypotheses that cirrhosis mortality rates are positively associated with per capita alcohol consumption and negatively associated with Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) membership rates. DESIGN: The impact of alcohol consumption levels and AA membership rates on cirrhosis mortality rates in Ontario from 1968 to 1989 were examined. Time-series analyses with ARIMA modelling were applied to male and female cirrhosis mortality rates in three age groups: 15-44, 45-64 and 65 + years. Missing AA membership data were interpolated using two methods: linear splines and cubic splines. FINDINGS: In general, cirrhosis mortality rates were positively associated with alcohol consumption and negatively associated with AA membership. For some age and gender combinations, these effects were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The limits of this study include restrictions in the length of series available and in the ability to infer causality. Despite these limitations, these findings are consistent with previous research demonstrating that per capita consumption is a strong determinant of cirrhosis mortality rates, and also that higher levels of AA membership can reduce cirrhosis mortality rates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsFrench-language works237,207