PERCEPTION OF HARM AND BENEFITS OF CANNABIS USE AMONG ADOLESCENTS FROM LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: to investigate the perception of harms and benefits associated with cannabis use among adolescents and how regulatory changes might affect their intention to use marijuana. Method: this multi-centric cross-sectional survey study. participants included 2717 students aged 15-17 from 10 cities in Belize, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Mexico, St. Kitts and Nevis, and Trinidad and Tobago. Results: an average lifetime prevalence of cannabis use of 30.6% (25.8% past year, 15.8% past 30 days). Most participants reported that their closest friends use cannabis (60%); many (55%) stated that they would not use marijuana, even if it were legally available. Conclusion: statistics revealed that a strong perception of benefits, a low perception of risk, and friends’ use of cannabis were associated with individual use as well as intention to use within a hypothetical context of regulatory change.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".