MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417529242 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-33405-9

Factors influencing complete abstinence during Thailand’s temporary alcohol abstinence campaign

2025· article· en· W4417529242 on OpenAlexaff
Paithoon Sonthon, Nittaya Srisuk, Manolee S. Penpong, Bundit Sornpaisarn, Jürgen Rehm, Udomsak Saengow

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCanadian Centre on Substance Use and AddictionUniversity of TorontoPublic Health OntarioCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCenter for Alcohol StudiesThai Health Promotion Foundation
KeywordsAbstinencePopularitySexual abstinenceMedia campaignPersistence (discontinuity)Injury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thailand's temporary abstinence campaign aims to persuade drinkers to abstain from alcohol for three months during Buddhist Lent. In recent years, a decline in the popularity of the campaign has been observed. This study aims to determine factors associated with success in complete abstinence during the campaign period and to determine whether the associations change over time to provide insight into the decline in complete abstinence. This study analyzes pooled data of 5898 current drinkers from three waves (2015, 2018, and 2021) of the campaign evaluation survey. The primary outcome is complete abstinence during the campaign. Multivariable analysis indicated that campaign media exposure was associated with complete abstinence (OR, 1.42; 95% CI 1.17-1.72). Similarly, the year 2018, older age, lesser drinking frequency prior to the campaign, and higher level of affordability were positively associated with complete abstinence. There was a statistically significant interaction between year and drinking frequency prior to the campaign (p < 0.001). The decline in complete abstinence was plausibly explained by reduced campaign media exposure, increased drinking frequency among drinkers, and the 2021 period effect (presumably COVID-19). Diversifying campaign media distribution across traditional, community-based, and digital platforms may enhance the campaign's success by ensuring wider exposure to campaign messages.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 venueScientific Reports→Same topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→