MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145260356 · doi:10.1177/009145091203900204

Relationships of Alcohol Use and Alcohol Problems to Probable Anxiety and Mood Disorder

2012· article· en· W2145260356 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Drug Problems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodAnxietyOddsPsychiatryLogistic regressionPopulationAlcohol use disorderClinical psychologyPsychologyAlcoholDistressAffect (linguistics)MedicineEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the effects of alcohol consumption and problem drinking on probable anxiety and mood disorder (AMD). Data were taken from the 2000–2006 CAMH Monitor (N = 15,653) general population survey of Ontario adults. Scoring 4+ on the 12-item General Health Questionnaire defined probable AMD, as suggested by recent research. Logistic regression showed that respondents with alcohol problems had significantly increased odds of probable AMD, but those reporting moderate daily alcohol consumption (up to 2 drinks) had decreased odds of probable AMD compared to abstainers. These data replicate other recent research in suggesting that the relationship between alcohol and adverse psychological states, such as psychological distress and probable anxiety and mood disorder, may not be monotonic. Several ways in which selection bias could account for these findings are discussed, as well as other possible causative mechanisms.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.196 · 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