MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407199515 · doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104732

Socio-spatial inequalities in alcohol outlet availability: Evidence from register data in 15 urban areas in Québec, Canada

2025· article· en· W4407199515 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Stephanie Sersli, Philippe Apparicio, Martine Shareck

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Drug Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsRegister (sociolinguistics)InequalityGeographyEnvironmental healthMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alcohol spatial availability is linked with public health issues, with disadvantaged populations experiencing disproportionate harm. This study examined the association between alcohol spatial availability and area-level measures of disadvantage and sociodemographic characteristics in Québec, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using 2021 liquor register and census data across 15 Québec urban areas. Measures included outlet counts within 800 m buffers and a spatial access index. Multilevel regression models assessed associations with composite measures of area-level disadvantage and single-item measures of area-level sociodemographic characteristics. FINDINGS: On average, Québec areas exhibited higher offsite than onsite alcohol outlet availability. We found a J-shaped relationship between offsite alcohol availability and material disadvantage, with the most disadvantaged areas having 25 % more offsite outlets (95 % CI: 1.14-1.37) than the least disadvantaged. Conversely, onsite availability was 24 % lower (95 % CI: 0.67-0.87) in the most materially disadvantaged areas. Social disadvantage was associated with higher availability of both offsite and onsite outlets, with the highest socially disadvantaged areas having nearly 15 times as many onsite outlets (IRR 14.77, 95 % CI: 13.05-16.72) compared to the least disadvantaged. Higher population density and higher percentages of young adults, new immigrants, and recent movers were also associated with higher availability. CONCLUSION: Alcohol availability differed by outlet type and disadvantage dimension. Offsite outlets were more common in both highly and minimally materially disadvantaged areas, while onsite outlets were more common in minimally disadvantaged areas. Socially disadvantaged areas had higher availability of both types of outlets. These findings suggest the need for targeted policies to reduce alcohol outlet availability, particularly in socially disadvantaged areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Drug PolicySame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207