Examining the association between public health unit spending and adolescent substance use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Based on the socio-ecological model of health, socioeconomic policy is an important determinant of population health. Spending decisions by public health units (PHU) have been shown to be associated with population health outcomes. Some studies have found greater PHU spending to be associated with improved population health, while others report mixed findings, warranting further research. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between per capita PHU spending and self-reported substance use among Canadian adolescents. Methods: Cross-sectional, multilevel modelling was conducted using student data from the 7th wave (2018/19) of the Cannabis use, Obesity, Mental health, Physical activity, Alcohol use, Smoking, and Sedentary behaviour (COMPASS) study, as well as spending data from the audited financial statements of Ontario's PHUs. The sample included 29,056 students in grades 9-12 attending 61 secondary schools in 15 PHUs across Ontario. Substance use was measured as the self-reported use of alcohol, cannabis, cigarettes and e-cigarettes, at least once per month on average. Results: Approximately 50 % of the study sample was female and the majority identified as being White. Per capita spending ranged from $54.07 to $224.95, with a median spending amount of $89.62. The highest quartile of PHU spending was significantly associated with higher alcohol use (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.41, 95 % CI: 1.04, 1.91), binge drinking (AOR: 1.71, 95 % CI: 1.18, 2.48), and cigarette use (AOR: 2.19, 95 % CI: 1.23, 3.91) in adolescents, while the second highest quartile was associated with lower e-cigarette use (AOR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.56, 0.98), relative to the lowest quartile. Conclusion: Public health spending is associated with adolescent substance use. The present study reports mixed results, warranting further prospective research to explore the directions and mechanisms of the associations found.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".