MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7010036198

Gender-Responsive Approaches to the Acceptability, Availability and Affordability of Alcohol. Brief 11

2024· other· en· W7010036198 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearchOnline · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Production (economics)Work (physics)Quality (philosophy)PaymentPublic policyProductivityInvestment (military)Key (lock)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gender-related norms persist in our societies, including in the consumption of alcohol. Despite knowing that men and women consume alcohol differently and are affected by its harm differently, alcohol control policies remain essentially gender blind. Highly gendered approaches to alcohol marketing and gender differences in patterns of alcohol consumption and its associated harm are well documented. Relatively little evidence has examined the different effects of population-level alcohol control policies on different genders, and even less has addressed how gender intersects with socioeconomic status, age, ethnicity, and other factors.<br/>Experiences from countries illustrate gendered approaches being used by the alcohol industry (Brazil and the United States) and the innovative ways that governments and civil society organizations are tackling the gendered effects of alcohol consumption. This includes promoting employment outside the alcohol industry (United Republic of Tanzania), developing gender-specific supports for alcohol consumption (Pakistan and Scotland), mobilizing civil society to enforce marketing bans (Sri Lanka) and creating culturally sensitive and culturally embedded policies (Aotearoa New Zealand). There is a clear need for policy-relevant research that supports an increased understanding of what works for gender-responsive approaches to reduce the harm caused by alcohol consumption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.143 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearchOnlineSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207