MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perspectiva crítica de la familia y de personas cercanas sobre factores de riesgo familiares y comunitarios en el uso de drogas ilícitas en San José, Costa Rica

2009· article· es· W1539763760 on OpenAlexaff
Mabell Granados Hernández, Bruna Brands, Edward M. Adlaf, Norman Giesbrecht, Laura Simich, Maria da Glória Miotto Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem · 2009
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth, Drugs, and Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)FeelingAddictionPsychologyIllicit drugFamily conflictPopulationPeer pressureMedicineDemographyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryDrugSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of a quantitative study. The purpose was to describe the perspective of family members and acquaintances of illicit drug users about family and community risk factors that can contribute to addiction to illicit drugs. A questionnaire was used for data collection. The population consisted of 100 individuals, 18 years of age or older, who reported being affected by their relationship with an illicit drug user (relative or acquaintance). Most users (82%) were men, with an average age of 27.3 years. Family risk factors included: family rejection (99%), not feeling loved (98%), lack of communication (95%), family conflicts and violence (95%). Social or community factors included: 99% having friends who use drugs, 99% peer pressure, 93% living in an unsafe area, and 99% experienced a stressful event. The critical perspective proposes to use more prevention strategies to avoid risk factors in the family and community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Latino-Americana de EnfermagemSame topicYouth, Drugs, and ViolenceFrench-language works237,207