[Perceived norms among university students about their peers and drug use in Bogota, Colombia].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The objective of this study was to estimate the difference between perceived norms for drug use among university students and their peers, with ages between 18 and 24 years, and attending education and health courses. This cross-sectional study was based on a survey and an anonymous self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: in total, 365 students participated. The rates for drug use over the last year were as follows: 43.6% for tobacco; 96.2% for alcohol; 8.2% for marijuana; and 2.2% for cocaine. The perceived norm for drug use over the last year was 78.9% for tobacco, 88.3% for alcohol, 35.4% for marijuana and 20.9% for cocaine. The consumption of alcoholic beverages and the perceived norm were very close, but it was overestimated for tobacco use. Regarding access to drugs being easy or very easy on campus, access to cigarettes and cocaine was underestimated, while marijuana was overestimated. CONCLUSIONS: university students overestimate the use of tobacco, marijuana and cocaine by their peers and have a correct perception of alcohol use. Tobacco is the substance with the most overestimated 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".