MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adolescent tobacco and cannabis use: young adult outcomes from the Ontario Child Health Study

2007· article· en· W2151865811 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katholiki Georgiades, Michael H. Boyle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
KeywordsPsychologyCannabisTobacco useYoung adultPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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 score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations114
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Psychology and PsychiatrySame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207