Prince Albert youth drug and alcohol use: a comparison study of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, and Canada youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community Mobilization Prince Albert’s (CMPA) Hub and Centre of Responsibility (COR) had been dealing with high rates of youth arrest and referrals to treatment facilities stemming from youth substance abuse. To better help the CMPA craft policies to counter the high rates of youth alcohol and drug use, a study was conducted in June of 2012 that utilized a school survey of PA youth. Data were collected from four local Prince Albert high schools and compared with Saskatchewan and Canadian youth. Analyses of the data were conducted using logistic regression and bivariate correlation. The following paper will provide an overview of the study and explain why youth substance abuse was chosen for this study. Later sections will examine how the Prince Albert school survey was formulated for comparison purposes with Saskatchewan and Canadian youth data obtained from the 2010-11 Youth Smoking Survey (YSS). This will be followed by an overview of the study’s key findings, along with results of logistic regression and bivariate correlation analysis and the study’s limitations. A final section will examine the implications of this study’s findings on youth substance abuse policy and programs for the CMPA Hub and COR, along with the city of PA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".