Providing personalized assessment feedback for problem drinking on the Internet: a pilot project.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This project developed an Internet program that conducts a brief assessment of an individual's drinking habits and then provides normative feedback comparing the user's drinking to that of others of the same gender and age group. The Internet program, "Try Our Free Drinking Evaluation," was based at the Addiction Research Foundation Internet web site (now at http://notes.camh.net/efeed.nsf/ newform). METHOD: A voluntary survey linked to the participant's feedback summary collected respondents' impressions of the program. RESULTS: During the trial period, the site received approximately 500 hits per month. While the feedback was generally well received, the weekly summary format was less credible to those individuals who drink less than once per week or whose consumption varies a great deal over time. CONCLUSIONS: Given these pilot results indicating that there is an audience for Internet-based interventions, the next step is to evaluate whether receiving such personalized feedback materials on the Internet leads to any change in drinking behavior by participants
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".