Perceptions of and adherence to early COVID-19-related restrictions and associations with substance use among youth in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: As a largely social behaviour, substance use may have decreased for some youth overall in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, continued use may indicate nonadherence to pandemic-related restrictions and social distancing measures. In a sample of Canadian adolescents (aged 12-19 years), our objective was to examine how substance use (cannabis, binge drinking, cigarettes, vaping) is associated with perceptions of, and adherence to, early COVID-19-related public health measures, taking into consideration sociodemographic factors. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were retrieved from online data collected during Year 8 of the COMPASS school-based study, during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (May-July 2020) in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec. We fitted two models using generalized estimating equations to examine how substance use was associated with separate measures of (1) perceptions of, and (2) adherence to early COVID-19 restrictions. RESULTS: In our sample, 10% of adolescents perceived COVID-19 restrictions as too weak and 14% perceived them as too strict. Nearly half (46%) reported taking restrictions very seriously, and 5% did not take them seriously at all. Binge drinking, cigarette use and vaping were associated with perceptions that restrictions were too strict and with nonadherence. However, adolescents who used cannabis were less likely to perceive COVID-19-related restrictions as too strict. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the association of adolescent substance use with perceptions of, and adherence to, COVID-19-related public health restrictions in Canada. Our findings emphasize a need for continual monitoring of substance use behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic to better characterize adolescent risk and further inform targeted public health strategies accordingly.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".