Adolescent tobacco and cannabis use: young adult outcomes from the Ontario Child Health Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examines the longitudinal associations between adolescent tobacco and cannabis use and young adult functioning. METHODS: Data for analysis come from the Ontario Child Health Study (OCHS), a prospective study of child health, psychiatric disorder and adolescent substance use in a general population sample that began in 1983, with follow-ups in 1987 and 2001. The sample for analysis includes 1,282 individuals who were between the ages of 12 and 16 years during the original OCHS in 1983 or the first follow-up in 1987 and returned for the 2001 follow-up. RESULTS: Tobacco use in adolescence and continued use in adulthood is associated with increased risk for poorer functioning across multiple domains, including physical health and life satisfaction (.62 and .66 standard units lower, respectively), depression (Odds Ratio = 3.44), personal income ($7,281 less per year) and years of education (2.29 years lower). Cannabis use is associated with a reduced set of adverse outcomes and the magnitude of the effects is weaker. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term risks associated with adolescent tobacco and cannabis use speak to the importance of prevention and early intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".