Binge drinking and smoking are associated with worse academic performance in Canadian undergraduate students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Test the hypothesis that smoking, fast-food consumption, and binge drinking were negatively associated with academic performance in Canadian undergraduate students.Participants Undergraduate students across Canada [n = 411 (335♀) aged: 22 ± 4 years] completed a questionnaire regarding their lifestyle behaviors and academic grades.Methods Relationships between lifestyle behaviors and academic performance were assessed via covariate-adjusted multiple regressions. Mediation models were used to test whether significant relationships between smoking/fast-food and grades were explained by binge drinking.Results Smoking (β= −4.00, p < .001) and binge drinking (β= −1.98, p = .002) were independent predictors of grades (average: 84 ± 8%). Binge drinking partially mediated the relationships between smoking (indirect effect β= −1.19, 95%CI [−2.49, −0.08] and fast-food consumption (indirect effect: β= −.75, 95%CI [−1.20, −0.29]), with grades.Conclusions These findings highlight the negative influence of binge drinking, smoking, and fast-food consumption on academic success, with binge drinking as a partial mediator of these relationships.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".