Search alternatives:
mean decrease » a decrease (Expand Search)
ng decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
mean decrease » a decrease (Expand Search)
ng decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
-
701
-
702
-
703
Paeameter ranges and optimal values.
Published 2025“…Firstly, recursive feature elimination using cross validation (RFECV), maximum information coefficient (MIC), and mean decrease accuracy (MDA) methods were utilized to select population distribution feature factors. …”
-
704
Improved random forest algorithm.
Published 2025“…Firstly, recursive feature elimination using cross validation (RFECV), maximum information coefficient (MIC), and mean decrease accuracy (MDA) methods were utilized to select population distribution feature factors. …”
-
705
Datasets used in the study area.
Published 2025“…Firstly, recursive feature elimination using cross validation (RFECV), maximum information coefficient (MIC), and mean decrease accuracy (MDA) methods were utilized to select population distribution feature factors. …”
-
706
Evaluation of the improved random forest model.
Published 2025“…Firstly, recursive feature elimination using cross validation (RFECV), maximum information coefficient (MIC), and mean decrease accuracy (MDA) methods were utilized to select population distribution feature factors. …”
-
707
Comparison of model metrics.
Published 2025“…Firstly, recursive feature elimination using cross validation (RFECV), maximum information coefficient (MIC), and mean decrease accuracy (MDA) methods were utilized to select population distribution feature factors. …”
-
708
Flowchart of population spatialization.
Published 2025“…Firstly, recursive feature elimination using cross validation (RFECV), maximum information coefficient (MIC), and mean decrease accuracy (MDA) methods were utilized to select population distribution feature factors. …”
-
709
-
710
-
711
-
712
-
713
-
714
-
715
-
716
-
717
Patterns of lifetime use of substances by gender.
Published 2023“…The lifetime prevalence of substance use was 41.5%, while that of alcohol use was 36%. For both, a higher mean neuroticism score [substance use- (AOR 1.05, 95%CI; 1, 1.10: p = 0.013); alcohol use- (AOR 1.04, 95%CI; 0.99, 1.09: p = 0.032)] showed increased odds of lifetime use, while a higher mean agreeableness score [substance use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.008); alcohol use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.032)] showed decreased odds of lifetime use. …”
-
718
S1 Data -
Published 2023“…The lifetime prevalence of substance use was 41.5%, while that of alcohol use was 36%. For both, a higher mean neuroticism score [substance use- (AOR 1.05, 95%CI; 1, 1.10: p = 0.013); alcohol use- (AOR 1.04, 95%CI; 0.99, 1.09: p = 0.032)] showed increased odds of lifetime use, while a higher mean agreeableness score [substance use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.008); alcohol use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.032)] showed decreased odds of lifetime use. …”
-
719
Factors associated with substance use.
Published 2023“…The lifetime prevalence of substance use was 41.5%, while that of alcohol use was 36%. For both, a higher mean neuroticism score [substance use- (AOR 1.05, 95%CI; 1, 1.10: p = 0.013); alcohol use- (AOR 1.04, 95%CI; 0.99, 1.09: p = 0.032)] showed increased odds of lifetime use, while a higher mean agreeableness score [substance use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.008); alcohol use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.032)] showed decreased odds of lifetime use. …”
-
720
Factors associated with personality traits.
Published 2023“…The lifetime prevalence of substance use was 41.5%, while that of alcohol use was 36%. For both, a higher mean neuroticism score [substance use- (AOR 1.05, 95%CI; 1, 1.10: p = 0.013); alcohol use- (AOR 1.04, 95%CI; 0.99, 1.09: p = 0.032)] showed increased odds of lifetime use, while a higher mean agreeableness score [substance use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.008); alcohol use- (AOR 0.99, 95%CI; 0.95, 1.02: p = 0.032)] showed decreased odds of lifetime use. …”