SUBSTANCE USE AND MENTAL HEALTH SYMPTOMS Risk and Protective Factors for Adolescent Substance Use and Mental Health Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the association between youth substance use patterns and mental health symptoms, and the risk and protective factors unique and common to each of these areas. A survey was administered to a random sample of 663 youth ages 12 to 18 in Victoria, British Columbia. As expected, age was a strong predictor of greater frequency and amounts of alcohol consumption. Males were at higher risk for alcohol consumption and externalizing problems while females were more susceptible to internalizing problems. Youth who scored lower on substance use and reported fewer mental health symptoms rated their parents and peers as being more protective. Youth who scored higher on substance use scored higher on the risky peer affiliations scale. Mental health surveys have shown that there is a very high prevalence of psychiatric morbidity in youth aged 15–24 years (e.g., Kessler et al., 1994). Many health authorities in Canada, for example in Ontario and British Columbia, have moved to amalgamate addiction and mental health services. The successful implementation of these integrated services for youth requires an understanding of the nature of the association between substance use and mental health in youth, and the risk and protective
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".