Access to substance use services on campus: What’s available in Ontario, Canada’s post-secondary institutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine substance use services available to post-secondary students in Ontario, Canada. Participants: All 23 universities and 24 public colleges in the province. Methods: Researchers coded substance use service information on institutional websites and social media. Mental health service information was also described in case substance use services were embedded in general mental healthcare. Chi-square tests evaluated relationships between institution size and substance use service availability. Results: Most institutions provided students with access to mental health services (counseling [96%], psychoeducational resources [83%], crisis services [91%]), either directly through institutions (62%) or through partnerships with external professionals (38%). Only 38% of any counseling service and 34% of psychoeducational resources specifically addressed substance use. Conclusions: Low rates of substance use-specific services at Ontario post-secondary institutions suggest that institutions are not meeting students’ substance use needs. Integrated services and specialized training for mental health professionals are essential to address substance use among post-secondary students.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".