Parental Patterns of Alcohol Consumption During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic led to public health restrictions that impacted the lives of people across the globe. Parents were particularly burdened with balancing multiple responsibilities, such as working from home while caring for and educating their children. Alcohol use among parents is an area that warrants further exploration. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate patterns of parental alcohol consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on relative changes in the frequency and quantity of alcohol use compared to prepandemic use, nonparent adult samples, or both. METHODS: A scoping review informed by the methodology of Arksey and O'Malley explored patterns of parental alcohol consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic. Searches were conducted in CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Search terms were created using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework of Population, Concept, and Context, with the population being parents and the concept being alcohol consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The database search yielded 3568 articles, which were screened for eligibility. Of the 3568 articles, 40 (1.12%) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the scoping review. Findings indicated the following: (1) having children at home was a factor associated with parental patterns of alcohol use; (2) mixed findings regarding gender-related patterns of alcohol consumption; and (3) linkages between parental patterns of alcohol use and mental health symptoms of stress, depression, and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review revealed heterogeneous patterns in parental alcohol use across sociocultural contexts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the known harms of alcohol use, it is worthwhile for clinicians to assess parental drinking patterns and initiate conversations regarding moderation in alcohol 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 | 0.007 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".