MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991011667 · doi:10.1080/10503300701858362

Randomized control trial of an integrated therapy for comorbid anger and gambling

2008· article· en· W1991011667 on OpenAlexaff
Lorne Korman, Jane Collins, Nina Littman-Sharp, Wayne Skinner, Shelley McMain, Virginia Mercado

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Mental Health & Substance Use Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngerPsychologyRandomized controlled trialAddictionSubstance useClinical psychologyPsychiatryTraitPsychotherapistComorbidityGambling disorderMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated an integrated treatment for comorbid problem gambling, anger, and substance use. Problem gamblers with comorbid anger problems (N=42), half of whom also had substance use disorders, were randomized to either a 14-week integrated treatment targeting anger and addictions (i.e., both gambling and substance use) or a specialized treatment-as-usual (TAU) for gambling and substance use. Participants were assessed at baseline (Tl), 14 weeks (T2), and 12 weeks follow-up (T3). Relative to the TAU, participants in the integrated anger and addictions treatment reported significantly less gambling at T2 and T3 and less trait anger and substance use at T3. Findings suggest that it is important to screen gambling clients for the presence of comorbid anger and substance use problems and that, when present, these problems need to be addressed concurrently in gambling treatment in order to optimize treatment outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.391
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychotherapy ResearchSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207