Association between Nightlife Goers’ Likelihood of an Alcohol Use Disorder and Their Preferred Bar’s Closing Time: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study in Perth, Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and aims: Associations between longer-term alcohol-related conditions and licensed outlet trading hours are not well understood. We investigated the association between nightlife-goers’ likelihood of an alcohol use disorder (AUD) and their preference for bars with special permits to remain open ‘late’ (i.e., spent more time there compared to any other venue) until 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. (Friday; Saturday) or midnight (Sunday) compared to bars with ‘standard’ closing times of midnight (Friday; Saturday) or 10 p.m. (Sunday). Design and methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in four major nightlife areas of Perth, Australia, in 2015–2016. We conducted weekend street intercept surveys outside bars between 8 p.m. and 3 a.m. and screened participants who reported alcohol use prior to the survey and spent more time in a bar than any other venue type (n = 667) regarding their past year drinking pattern using AUDIT-C (n = 459). We used gender-specific logistic regression models to estimate associations between AUDIT-C categories (1–4, low risk; 5–7, hazardous; 8–12, active AUD) and preference for bars with different closing times (late vs. standard). Results: A large proportion of participants were hazardous drinkers or had active AUD (83% males; 65% females), and over half preferred a late to a standard closing bar. We found evidence of a positive association between preference for late closing bars and hazardous drinking females (OR = 3.48; 95% CI 1.47–8.23; p = 0.01), but not for females with active AUD, male hazardous drinkers, nor males with active AUD. Discussion and conclusions: Our study adds new evidence on associations between likelihood of AUD among nightlife-goers and trading hours. With increasing international relaxation of trading hours, evidence that late closing bars may be preferred by hazardous drinking females will be of concern to policymakers wanting to curb alcohol-related harms in the community.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".