MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205121774 · doi:10.29173/cjfy29755

Causes of Drug Initiation among Adolescents

2022· article· en· W4205121774 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marek Motyka, Ahmed Al-Imam

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la Jeunesse · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonprobability samplingPsychological interventionExploratory researchPsychologyDrugThe InternetPeer educationPeer groupMass mediaEmpirical researchDevelopmental psychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatryAdvertisingHealth educationSocial scienceSociologyNursingPublic healthBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drug use is a behaviour frequently seen among adolescents. The World Drug Report draws attention to the increase in this phenomenon. The studies were undertaken to look for determinants that promote drug use and those that protect against reckless activities. It seems important to determine the causes of drug initiation. The presented study aimed to identify the determinants favouring first contact with drugs among adolescents. Eighteen respondents participated in the study. Purposive sampling was used and data were collected using categorized interviews. The exploratory nature of the interviews focused on obtaining information on three areas: family life, peer influences and the role of mass culture products. Education, financial background, and inquiries about life plans, dreams, and their realization were also recorded. The analysis of empirical data made it possible to establish interesting factors conducive to the respondents’ first contact with drugs both in the family environment, peer environment, but also related to popular culture, lifestyle, the influence of significant others, as well as to the dangers of the Internet. Established causes of drug initiations are indicated. The obtained results can be used in designing preventive interventions among adolescents. They can also be the basis for planning further studies with this group.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la JeunesseSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207