Prevalence and pattern of energy drink intake among Australian adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Energy drinks (ED) are popular among young people despite evidence of associated health risks. Research into the prevalence and pattern of ED intake among young people is sparse. The present study investigates the prevalence and pattern of ED intake among a large sample of adolescents, including how many consume them, how often, for what reasons and in what contexts. METHODS: In 2018, all students in grades 7-12 attending 25 randomly selected Western Australian schools were invited to complete an online self-report survey about EDs. RESULTS: Of the 3688 respondents, 51.2% reported consuming an ED. Of these 'ever consumers', 23.4% drank them monthly, 19.2% weekly and 2% every day. The average age of first intake was 10.7 years. One-fifth (19.7%) of 'ever consumers' reported consuming more than two EDs in 1 day. Reasons for ED use included taste, to boost energy levels, sport performance and studying. CONCLUSIONS: The findings add to limited international evidence about adolescent ED use and provide valuable information to help ensure interventions to reduce intake address the underlying reasons and contexts of ED consumption.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".