MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087550624 · doi:10.1111/dar.13180

Future of surveys in the alcohol field

2020· letter· en· W3087550624 on OpenAlexaff
Jürgen Rehm, Carolin Kilian, Jakob Manthey

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug and Alcohol Review · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicStatus quoPopulationField (mathematics)Probabilistic logicRisk analysis (engineering)PsychologyManagement sciencePolitical scienceComputer scienceMedicineEnvironmental healthSocial psychologyEngineeringLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Responding to the commentaries on a recent paper on the elusiveness of representativeness in general population alcohol surveys, we can summarise that there is agreement that the status quo of current alcohol surveys is scientifically no longer defensible. Current surveys cannot per se be assumed to yield representative results for the general populations of countries based on a probabilistic sampling alone. Alternatives are discussed and-as for any survey-creative ideas on validating key results on indicators or hypotheses need to be developed and used. This will inevitably lead away from omnibus surveys to more focused studies requiring more complex methodological tools. While there may not be obvious solutions for every problem related to alcohol use prevention and policy or treatment use disorders, and it may take years to find solutions for some of the issues, continued use of the methodology of the status quo will surely fail to answer the questions posed by modern societies concerning these issues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug and Alcohol ReviewSame topicAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsFrench-language works237,207