The Impact of Harmful Habits on Academic Performance and Sports Activities among Young People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smoking and alcohol consumption is a growing trend among young people worldwide. The purpose of this study was to provide students with a comparative analysis of adherence to harmful habits (smoking and alcohol) on the one hand and the frequency of sports and academic performance on the other, taking into account gender differences. The research was conducted in 2019-2020 in 5 cities of Russia; the sample included 1500 people aged 18.4 ± 1.1 years, divided into three equal groups. The control (first) group had students who are not engaged in sports, and the second group comprised students practicing sports but not professionally. The third group was made up of student-athletes. All participants were surveyed to determine the frequency of adherence to harmful habits. In the control group, boys smoked 50% more often than girls (p ≤ 0.05), while in the third group, smoking among boys was registered 70 times less often (p ≤ 0.001). Alcohol consumption in controls was 0.5 times more likely among boys (p ≤ 0.05). Harmful habits affect young people's free time and reduce their academic performance and ability to practice sports.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".