MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1823402976 · doi:10.71781/17994

État de stress post-traumatique comorbide, facteurs de risque et de protection parmi des individus itinérants en traitement pour des troubles liés à l’utilisation de substances

2010· dissertation· fr· W1823402976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
François Lalonde

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic stressPsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologySubstance abuseMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peu d’études explorent les fréquences de traumas et d’état de stress posttraumatique (ÉSPT) chez les itinérants, spécifiquement parmi ceux avec des troubles liés à l’utilisation de substances (TUS). L’objectif principal de cette étude était de mesurer les fréquences de trauma et d’ÉSPT parmi les usagers en traitement pour des TUS à Montréal. L’autre objectif était de vérifier les différences entre ceux ayant ou non un ÉSPT. 51 individus itinérants, 9 femmes et 42 hommes, ont constitué l’échantillon. L’âge moyen était de 46 ans (SD = 7.19). Les participants ont vécu en moyenne 4.24 (SD = 2.06) types de trauma. 49% de l’échantillon avaient potentiellement un diagnostic d’ÉSPT. La majorité avait: un parent alcoolique, vécu un trauma dans l’enfance et un soutien social faible. Les participants qui avaient potentiellement un diagnostic d’ÉSPT: avaient un parent alcoolique, vécurent un trauma dans l’enfance et utilisaient davantage de stratégies de coping inadaptées.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)→Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→