MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2206098064 · doi:10.1093/pch/14.4.225

The role of economic and cultural status as risk indicators for alcohol and marijuana use among adolescents

2009· article· en· W2206098064 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark Lemstra, Cory Neudorf, Ushasri Nannapaneni, Norman R. Bennett, Christina Scott, Tanis Kershaw

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health Authority
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAlcoholEnvironmental healthPsychologyDemographyMedicineSociologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A number of reports suggest that Aboriginal cultural status is a major risk indicator for drug and alcohol use. The primary purpose of the present paper was to determine whether Aboriginal cultural status is independently associated with risk behaviours, such as marijuana use and alcohol abuse, among youth after multivariate adjustment for other factors, such as socioeconomic status. METHODS: Every student between grades 5 and 8 in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, was asked to complete a questionnaire in February 2007. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent risk indicators associated with alcohol abuse and marijuana use. RESULTS: Four thousand ninety-three youth participated in the school health survey. At the cross-tabulation level, cultural status and neighbourhood income were both strongly associated with alcohol and marijuana use. After multivariate adjustment, the association between Aboriginal cultural status and alcohol abuse was not statistically significant (crude OR=3.52 to adjusted OR=0.80). For marijuana use, the association was significantly reduced (crude OR=9.91 to adjusted OR=2.79). After controlling for all other variables, results showed that low-income youth were 103% more likely to get drunk at least once and were 163% more likely to have tried marijuana at least once. CONCLUSION: To be more successful, future policies directed toward reducing risk behaviours among youth should consider neighbourhood income characteristics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207