MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407823129 · doi:10.3109/14659891.2016.1140235

Adjusting local alcohol consumption data for influence of tourists

2016· article· en· W2407823129 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michael Branion-Calles, Trisalyn Nelson, Gina Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Substance Use · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPer capitaTourismConsumption (sociology)Alcohol consumptionCensusGeographyEconometricsAlcoholAgricultural economicsEconomicsEnvironmental healthMedicinePopulationSociologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, alcohol consumption has considerable public health, social, and economic costs. Per capita alcohol sales data are the most accurate means of quantifying consumption, but can overestimate local consumption in areas of high tourism. The goal of this research was to investigate a method for adjusting estimates of per capita alcohol consumption for tourist influence in 26 census divisions (CD) in British Columbia, Canada. Modifying estimates involved calculating temporally weighted annual tourist populations for each CD, enumerating the proportion of tourists to local populations, and using this proportion to derive local per capita consumption modified for tourist alcohol consumption. The adjustments for tourist influence decreased consumption estimates by approximately 2% provincially and between 1% and 16%, regionally. This research provides a foundational model for estimating temporally weighted regional tourist populations and applying them to adjust alcohol consumption estimates.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Substance UseSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207