Drinking at European universities? A review of students' alcohol use
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: High volumes of alcohol consumption and risky single occasion drinking (RSOD) among university students have been shown to be associated with considerable harm to both those who consume alcohol and their fellow students. The vast majority of these studies are based on US and Canadian samples.\nAim: The present article provides an overview of the characteristics of alcohol-consuming university students in Europe.\nMethod: 65 relevant articles published within the last 20 years using European student populations could be identified.\nResults: Sociodemographic. individual, social, and university-related characteristics associated with alcohol consumption patterns could be identified. Male students, in particular, tended to consume alcohol more often and in higher quantities, including RSOD. Students consumed alcohol chiefly during social gatherings and for social and enhancement motives. Those without family obligations and those living alone, with roommates or in areas with a high density of students were more likely to consume alcohol in higher quantities, and to engage in RSOD. Students tend to overestimate the extent of their fellow students' alcohol consumption.\nConclusions: Health promotion and prevention efforts which focus on these characteristics (i.e., gender, drinking motives, living conditions and social norms), and which have been successful and evaluated among university students in the US and Canada, may also be very promising for their European counterparts.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it