Bullying Victimization and e‐Cigarette Use among Middle and High School Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bullying has been associated with several adverse health outcomes, including substance use. However, little is known about the association between bullying and e-cigarette use. This study examined the association between bully victimization and the frequency of e-cigarette use. METHODS: Data from the 2016-2017 Canadian Student Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey were used (N = 49,543). The target population consists of Canadian students enrolled in grades 7-12. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association between bullying victimization status and e-cigarette use. RESULTS: Among the students included in the study, 14.1% were bullied less than once a week. Bullying victimization was statistically significantly associated with higher odds of any e-cigarette use in the last 30 days. Likewise, those bullied daily or almost daily were more likely to use e-cigarettes more frequently compared to students not bullied. We found a statistically significant difference in analysis stratified by sex, with female bullying victims having higher odds of all measures of e-cigarette use. CONCLUSIONS: Bullying victims were significantly more likely to use an e-cigarette, and findings appeared to vary by sex. Female bullying victims had a higher likelihood of e-cigarette use.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it