MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417175768 · doi:10.1002/jcv2.70071

Decision‐making and risk‐taking as predictors of health risk behaviors in the Millennium Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4417175768 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole G. Hammond, Georgia Condran, Elise E. DeVito, Marie‐Claude Geoffroy, Ian Colman

Bibliographic record

VenueJCPP Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionCohort studyMultinomial logistic regressionCannabisHealth riskCohortPublic healthProspective cohort studyImpulsivityConsumption (sociology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Facets of decision-making and risk-taking are implicated in adolescent health risk behaviors; however, whether they may lead to adolescent engagement in substance use, gambling, and self-harm is unknown. Methods: = 8417). A computerized task-based measure of decision-making and risk-taking for reward (Cambridge Gambling Task) measured impulsivity, quality of decision-making, risk adjustment, and risk-taking (exposures) at age 14. Several health risk behaviors (outcomes) were self-reported at 14/17 years: cigarette use, electronic cigarette/vaping use, drinking, cannabis use, other illegal drug use (e.g., ecstasy), gambling, and self-harm. We conducted adjusted multinomial and logistic regression models. Results: Computerized task-based measures of greater impulsivity and risk-taking were most consistently associated with self-reported health risk behaviors at 14 and 17 years. Better quality of decision-making and risk adjustment were inconsistently associated with health outcomes at age 14; however, better risk adjustment was related to a reduced likelihood of all levels of cigarette and e-cigarette/vaping use (e.g., occasionally/regularly) when compared to nonusers. At age 14, risk-taking was associated with every self-reported health risk behavior (e.g., substance use, gambling) except for self-harm. In prospective models, relationships were attenuated, but risk-taking predicted new onset engagement in all forms of substance use except alcohol consumption and self-harm. Risk-taking was most strongly associated with other drug use (age 14: odds ratio (OR) = 11.26, 95% CI: 1.48, 86.01) and predictive of former vaping use (age 17: OR = 4.10, 95% CI: 1.43, 11.76). Conclusion: Risky betting on a computerized risk-taking task appears highly indicative of substance use and recent gambling at age 14 and predictive of new onset substance use and gambling 3 years later (age 17) for both sexes, but not self-harm.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.347 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCPP AdvancesSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207