Gender-specific associations between involvement in team sport culture and canadian adolescents’ substance-use behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian adolescents have some of the highest rates of substance use in the world. The etiology of this phenomenon has not been fully explored, and one possible contextual determinant is involvement in sport activities that foster risk-taking behaviors through physical and social mechanisms. Using the 2013-14 Health Behaviour in School Aged Children (HBSC) study we therefore examined this hypothesis in a contemporary national sample of Canadian adolescents. The strength and direction of the relationship between sport and substance use varied by gender and substance, with team sport participation associated with increased binge drinking (RR 1.33 [95% CI 1.13-1.56] for boys, RR 1.21 [1.06-1.38] for girls) and use of smokeless tobacco (RR 1.68 [1.34-2.10] for boys, RR 1.32 [1.01-1.72] for girls), but with lower prevalence levels of cannabis use (RR 0.73 [95% CI 0.61-0.88]) and cigarette smoking (RR 0.79 [95% CI 0.70-0.89]) in girls alone. We also compared team sport athletes with high social involvement (sports team as primary peer group) and physical involvement (higher number of days/week physically active) to those with low involvement. For boys, the combination of high physical and high social involvement was associated with the highest risk, while high social involvement alone was associated with the greatest risk for girls. While team sport participation confers only a small increased risk for substance use, the prevalence of sport participation results in a large population impact. Given this fact, interventions such as education for parents and coaches and policies encouraging engagement in a variety of extracurricular activities should be explored.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".