Shyness, social anxiety, social anxiety disorder, and substance use among normative adolescent populations: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers have increasingly studied shyness, social anxiety, and social anxiety disorder (SAD) as potential precursors of substance use. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to review the relationships between these variables and tobacco use, alcohol use, and cannabis/drug use in normative adolescent populations and the extent to which these associations differ by gender. METHODS: A systematic search in PsycINFO and PubMed was conducted, reference screening was performed, and five experts were consulted. RESULTS: Fifty articles published between 1980 and 2016 were included for review. Shyness was frequently associated with lower use of tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis/drug. Similar findings emerged for social anxiety. In contrast, SAD tended to be associated with higher use of tobacco and cannabis/drug, although the association between SAD and the use of alcohol appeared inconclusive. Furthermore, limited evidence suggests that shy females use less tobacco than shy males and that males with social anxiety use less drugs than socially anxious females. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, these results highlight that shyness, social anxiety, and SAD may exert different effects on substance use. Higher use of substances among adolescents suffering from a SAD may be explained, among other possibilities, by a self-medication mechanism. While all adolescents should benefit from prevention efforts targeted at substance use, a systematic screening for substance use disorders during the clinical evaluation that precedes SAD treatments is advised.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".