MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412819828 · doi:10.36922/jcbp025100018

Factors associated with alcohol and substance use in adolescents aged 12–15: A rapid review

2025· article· en· W4412819828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rafael Oliveira, Mariana Silva, João Tomás, Sandy Severino, Maria João Santos, André L. Maravilha, Susana Valido, Ricardo Mestre, Luís Fernando Freitas de Sousa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Basic Psychosomatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstance useAlcoholPsychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescents can often adopt behaviors that put them at risk and compromise their health. Among these behaviors, the most prominent is the use of psychoactive/addictive substances (alcohol, tobacco, and other illicit drugs). In recent years, there has been an increasing utilization trend of these substances in adolescents and within the peer group. The objective of this paper is to identify the factors associated with alcohol and substance consumption in adolescents aged 12–15. We followed the Cochrane recommendations for this rapid review. We used the CINAHL database through EBSCO to search for articles. Covidence software was used to screen the title and abstract, as well as the full text. Data extraction was carried out according to a table created by two reviewers. Quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool. Ten articles published between 2020 and 2024 and originating in the United States and Canada were included in the study. The studies included adolescents aged 11–19, encompassing the 12–15 age group targeted in our study, and examined substances such as alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, prescription drugs, and over-the-counter drugs. There are several contextual, relational, and personal factors that are positively and negatively associated with substance use in adolescents, and these are considered risk factors and protective factors, respectively. The findings of this rapid literature review contribute to the formulation of health policies and substance use prevention programs at global, European, national, and community levels.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0200.019
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical and Basic Psychosomatics→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→