Is Binge Drinking Onset Timing Related to Academic Performance, Engagement, and Aspirations Among Youth in the COMPASS Study?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some evidence suggests early initiation of alcohol use is associated with academic underachievement; however, substance use onset is an ambiguous concept, resulting in mixed findings across studies. Moreover, the quantity of early use is likely an important determinant. Binge drinking is a common pattern among younger cohorts, and is shown to magnify the risk of related problems. OBJECTIVES: The current study explored how students who initiated binge drinking early (grade 10 or earlier) or later in high school (grade 11 or 12) differed in relation to a variety of academic indices. METHODS: : 2014-2015) of the COMPASS study. Separate multinomial GEE models tested the likelihood of different responses to outcome measures of academic goals, engagement, preparedness, and performance based on the timing of binge drinking onset. Models adjusted for binge drinking initiation in varying frequencies, gender, grade, race/ethnicity, and smoking. RESULTS: Compared to students with earlier onsets of binge drinking, youth with later onsets were more likely to regularly attend class, complete their homework, value good grades, achieve high English or Math marks, have graduate/professional degree ambitions, and expect to obtain a college/trade school diploma after high school, yet they were less likely to expect to achieve a bachelor's degree. CONCLUSION: Results highlight the importance of substance use prevention programs targeting early adolescents. Both delaying and preventing binge drinking have the potential to improve scholastic outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".