Relationships Between Parenting and Dangerous Substance Use Behaviors Among Youth Experiencing Homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Understanding patterns of dangerous and illicit substance use among young parents who are homeless may provide insight into how best to support this highly vulnerable group and their children. This study examines the relationship between having a biological child and drug use among youth experiencing homelessness. Method: We used 4 waves of cross-sectional data from 1,010 youths ages 14–26 at 3 drop-in agencies serving youth experiencing homeless in Los Angeles, CA. Among participants, 23.8% of males and 28.9% of females had a biological child. We conducted multivariate logistic regression models for males and females on 4 substance use behaviors in the past month: binge drinking, using hard/illicit drugs, prescription drug misuse, and injection drug use. Results: Fathers had greater odds of hard drug use, prescription drug misuse, and injection drug use than males without children. There was no significant relationship between having a child and any of the four substance use behaviors for females. Conclusions: Findings suggest that having a child is not associated with higher risk of dangerous or illicit substance use for females. Results highlight the need to proactively engage young males in pregnancy prevention, parenting programs, and substance use treatment and prevention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".