The Impact of religiosity/spirituality on slowing the progression of substance use: Based on the National Epidemiological Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC-III)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Religiosity has been suggested to be protective against substance use disorder (SUD) initiation but its impact of the progression of development is not known. Aims: This study investigated the impact of religiosity/spirituality on the development of heavy use and SUD following substance use initiation (alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco) utilizing data from the 2012 to 2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III. Method: Individuals with a known age at onset of substance initiation were included ( n = 30,590, n = 11,126, and n = 14,083; for alcohol, cannabis, or tobacco users, respectively). Religiosity was measured by importance of religious/spiritual beliefs and frequency of religious service attendance. The percentage of individuals who progressed to an SUD after substance initiation in each substance was estimated. Discrete-time analysis and survival analysis were used to measure the impact of religiosity on the progression from substance initiation to heavy use and from heavy use to SUD. Results: After controlling for various variables, religious services attendance frequency was statistically associated with a slower progression from substance initiation to heavy use for all three substances: tobacco by 8% to 15%, cannabis by 5% to 26%, and alcohol 9% ( p ⩽ .01). Religious importance was associated with slower progression to heavy use in cannabis users by 16% to 21% ( p ⩽ .02). Religiosity (believes and attendance) was associated with slowed progression from heavy use to SUD development in alcohol users only. Conclusions: The findings illustrate strongest association between attending religious services and lower probabilities of progressing to heavy/daily use after substance use initiation for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis users. This indicates the potential use of religious services as social support for individuals with risky substance 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".