MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803256090 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.38.5.04

At-a-glance - Perceptions of caffeinated drinks among youth and young adults in Canada

2018· article· en· W2803256090 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
John C. Spence, Brittany Cormier, Jessica L. Reid, David Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCaffeinePerceptionPsychologyYoung adultEnvironmental healthMedicineGerontologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study assessed youth and young adults' perceptions and attitudes toward caffeine and energy drinks (EDs). An online survey was conducted with 2036 panelists aged 12-24, about caffeine and ED knowledge, caffeine perceptions, and perceptions of ED safety. Few respondents (2.1%) could state Health Canada's recommended limit for caffeine intake, although most participants (64.9%) correctly stated the maximum number of EDs that should be consumed per day. When shown four beverages, only 17.5% correctly identified the beverage with the most caffeine. Overall, young people generally have low levels of knowledge about caffeine amounts and intake from caffeinated beverages.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in CanadaSame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207