Itching for scratchcards: Problem gambling risks for Ontario baby boomers associated with instant ticket purchasing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A concurrent mixed method approach was used to explore risk factors for problem gambling associated with instant ticket purchase gambling (ITPG) by Ontario baby boomers (BB). In Study 1, a purposive sample of gambling counsellors was interviewed. Questions were guided by Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI) domains. Study 2 involved secondary analysis of CPGI data retrieved from the 2002 Canadian Community Health Survey 1.2 - Mental Health and Well-Being (CCHS 1.2). Three risk factors associated with ITPG were identified: additional gambling involvement, denial of gambling activity, and minimization of spending and financial consequences. Sampling bias in CCHS 1.2 gambling module precluded inferential testing. Available data revealed that ITPG involved 40% of BB in 2002, with at-risk/problem gambling prevalence 10.2%. Amongst problem gamblers, 75% pursued ITPG as one gambling activity. Based on these findings, the hypothesis that ITPG is a risk factor for development and maintenance of problem gambling was generated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".