FOC8-2A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF GENETIC FACTORS, HUMAN LABORATORY PHENOTYPES, AND HEAVY ALCOHOL USE IN LATE ADOLESCENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Measures of alcohol sensitivity are considered candidate endophenotypes and appear to anticipate future risk for alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, prospective studies have been rare, and past research has focused primarily on subjective alcohol effects in the absence of objective self-administration measures. Aims. This study examined prospective associations of subjective responses with laboratory self-administration and heavy drinking in late adolescence. Additionally, indirect associations of genetic risk factors (family history status and OPRM1 genotype) with prospective heavy drinking via laboratory phenotypes were evaluated. Methods. Participants (N = 61, M = 19.89 years, SD = 0.86) completed experimental sessions involving controlled intravenous alcohol administration (Session 1) and free-access intravenous self-administration (Session 2), followed by prospective assessments. Multi-level modeling evaluated self-administration profiles as a function of genetic factors and Session 1 subjective responses. Mediation models examined indirect associations of genetic factors with follow-up consumption via laboratory phenotypes. Results. Session 1 subjective responses predicted peak breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) in Session 2, which in turn predicted frequency of heavy episodic drinking at 6-month follow-up. Significant indirect effects were observed for both stimulation and sedation. Mediation models further supported significant indirect associations of family history (via Session 1 stimulation and Session 2 self-administration) and OPRM1 (via self-administration) with follow-up heavy drinking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".