Alcohol use in late adolescence and early adulthood: The role of generalized anxiety disorder and drinking to cope motives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between anxiety and alcohol use is unclear, and moderating factors, such as drinking to cope (DTC) motives, may explain mixed findings. METHODS: Using the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), we examined associations between generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) at age 18 and frequent drinking, frequent bingeing, hazardous drinking, and harmful drinking at ages 18 (unadjusted n = 3462) and 21 (unadjusted n = 2076), in a sample of late adolescent drinkers. Analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic, parental, and adolescent confounders. We also examined whether DTC motives influenced the strength and direction of associations between GAD and alcohol use. RESULTS: GAD was positively associated with all alcohol outcomes at baseline (unadjusted OR (95% CI): frequent drinking 1.40 (1.02-1.91); frequent bingeing 1.40 (0.96-2.04); hazardous drinking 1.44 (1.08-1.92); harmful drinking 1.98 (1.22-3.23)). GAD increased the odds of harmful drinking at age 21 (unadjusted OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.09-2.73), but there was no clear evidence of a longitudinal relationship between GAD and the other alcohol use outcomes. There was no clear evidence of a GAD x DTC interaction on alcohol use at ages 18 or 21. Findings were consistent across various multiply imputed datasets. CONCLUSIONS: In adolescence, GAD symptoms are associated with frequent drinking, frequent bingeing, hazardous drinking, and harmful drinking. In early adulthood, associations remain for harmful drinking only. DTC motives do not appear to moderate the relationship at either age.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".