MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W40055348

Predicting treatment outcome in chemically dependent women: A test of Marlatt and Gordon's Relapse Model.

2000· article· en· W40055348 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMathematics
ThématiqueAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOutcome (game theory)Test (biology)Internal medicineComputer scienceOncologyMedicineMathematicsBiologyMathematical economics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The purpose of the present study was to test and expand Marlatt and Gordon's (1985) Relapse Model using a sample of substance-abusing women. Marlatt and Gordon hypothesized that coping skills, positive expectancies, and self-efficacy would predict post-treatment substance use. They also hypothesized that individuals who experience the abstinence violation effect following an initial lapse would be at increased risk of further substance use. Variables representing issues relevant to women were added to the original model. Specifically, poly-drug addiction and experiences with physical and sexual abuse were hypothesized to be important in any relapse model applied to women. Questionnaires were administered to 98 chemically dependent women in treatment centres across Ontario one week within their discharge date, and one, two, and three months after leaving treatment. This study found some support for Marlatt and Gordon's Relapse Model. Self-efficacy was the strongest predictor of an initial, post-treatment lapse. Participants with lower self-efficacy were at greater risk for a lapse. In addition self-efficacy mediated the relationship between coping and relapse. Participants with poorer coping skills also had lower self-efficacy which placed them at increased risk of relapse. All but one woman who relapsed reported experiencing multiple lapses, therefore the second part of Marlatt and Gordon's model could not be tested. When a liberal level of significance was used, participants who had been physically abused as children were found to be more likely to relapse, but this relationship was also mediated by self-efficacy. Finally, there was a significant interaction between expectancies and poly-drug use. Poly-drug users with higher expectancies were more likely to relapse whereas single drug users with lower expectancies were more likely to relapse. The present study found that women's confidence in their ability to remain abstinent after treatment (i.e., self-efficacy) is a key predictor of post-treatment substance use. Confidence was affected by factors such as childhood victimization and ability to cope with cravings. Consequently, treatment programs should focus on increasing self-efficacy by teaching clients coping skills and addressing issues relevant to women, such as victimization. In addition, more research is needed to explore how other issues (e.g., family of origin, motivation, etc.) affect the recovery process in chemically dependent women.Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2000 .C67. Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-10, Section: B, page: 4777. Adviser: Charlene Senn. Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2000.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,388
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,067
Tête enseignante GPT0,307
Écart entre enseignants0,240 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)Même sujetAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesTravaux en français237 207