Binge drinking and academic performance, engagement, aspirations, and expectations: a longitudinal analysis among secondary school students in the COMPASS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The longitudinal relationship between binge drinking and academic engagement, performance, and future aspirations and expectations was examined among a cohort of secondary school students. METHODS: In separate multinomial generalized estimating equations models, linked data from Year 1 (Y1: 2012-2013), Year 2 (Y2: 2013-2014), and Year 3 (Y3: 2014-2015) of the COMPASS study (N = 27 112) were used to test the relative likelihood of responses to seven academic indices when binge drinking was initiated in varying frequencies, adjusting for gender, grade, race/ethnicity, tobacco use, and the individual mean of the predictor and all time-varying covariates. RESULTS: Among students who had never engaged in binge drinking at baseline, those who reported regular binge drinking at follow-up were relatively less likely to complete their homework, attend class, and value and achieve high grades, with more frequent binge drinking at follow-up generally resulting in larger relative risk ratios. Interestingly, shifting from "never" to "rare/sporadic" binge drinking one to two years later resulted in an increased relative risk of wanting to pursue all levels of postsecondary education. Beginning binge drinking on a "monthly" basis also increased the likelihood of college/ trade or bachelor degree ambitions, relative to high school, but not graduate/professional pathways; while degree aspirations were not associated with initiating weekly binge drinking. CONCLUSION: Results suggest students who initiate binge drinking have poor school performance and engagement, which may interfere with achieving their future academic goals. This study reinforces the reasons substance use prevention should be considered an academic priority, as such efforts may also prove beneficial for educational achievement.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".