MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Family relations, peer influence, spirituality and drug use among students in one university in Kingston, Jamaica

2015· article· en· W2287113664 on OpenAlexafffund
Howard Gough, Samantha Longman-Mills, Winston De La Haye, Robert B. Mann, Bruna Brands, Hayley A. Hamilton, Maria da Glória Miotto Wright, Francisco Cumsille, Akwatu Khenti

Bibliographic record

VenueTexto & Contexto - Enfermagem · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersForeign Affairs and International Trade CanadaGovernment of CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsCannabisSpiritualityDysfunctional familyClinical psychologyPsychologyProtective factorMedicinePsychiatryAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to illuminate the relationship between family relations, peer influence, spirituality and drug use among students in one university in Kingston, Jamaica. A cross-sectional survey design was employed to collect quantitative data from 335 undergraduate university students, using self-report questionnaires. The sample consisted of 335 students (69 % male and 31% female) between the ages 18-24 years. 77.6 % of the sample reported drug use within the past year. A significant positive correlation was identified between past year cannabis use and having dysfunctional and stressful family relationships (p<.05); and negative correlations between past year alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use and positive peer influence (p<.05) as well as higher levels of spirituality (p<.01). A connected family relationship was a protective factor against cannabis use, while positive peer influence and high levels of spirituality are protective factors against alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use among the students who participated in this study.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.314
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.105 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTexto & Contexto - EnfermagemSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207