Substance use and victimization experiences among college students in Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We examined relationships between different types and patterns of substance use and victimization experiences. PARTICIPANTS: College students from two universities in Spain completed an online, cross-sectional survey. METHOD: A series of tetrachoric correlations were estimated to examine the bivariate associations between different types of substances and victimization experiences. Regression analyses then examined relationships between patterns of substance use (non-users, mono-users, and poly-users), and victimization. RESULTS: Slightly over half (57.7%) of students reported any form of victimization during the previous year, and most students (87.0%) reported using substances during the last three months. Polysubstance users were more likely than non-users to experience any victimization, as well as multiple forms of victimization. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the importance of differentiating types and patterns of substance use when developing prevention and intervention programs. Implementing intervention strategies that target polysubstance users and decrease substance use could reduce rates of victimization among college students.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".