MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995527961 · doi:10.1080/10550490601184225

Sexual Abuse and the Outcome of Addiction Treatment

2007· article· en· W1995527961 on OpenAlexaff
Dara A. Charney, Jorge Palacios‐Boix, Kathryn Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal on Addictions · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcome (game theory)AddictionSexual abusePsychiatryPsychologyPsychotherapistCriminologyMedicineMedical emergencySuicide preventionPoison controlEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this prospective follow-up study was to examine the effects of sexual abuse on substance use disorder patients' clinical presentation and course in treatment. Consecutive admissions to the MUHC's Addictions Unit were assessed at intake (N=206) and six-month follow-up (n=172). Assessments evaluated socio-demographic and psychiatric characteristics, addiction severity, and physical and/or sexual abuse histories. Upon entering treatment, 23% reported prior sexual abuse with or without physical abuse. Patients with a sexual abuse history had higher rates of psychological problems, stronger family histories of substance use disorders, and more impaired family relationships. At six months, there were no differences between patients with and without sexual abuse histories in their response to treatment, or their utilization of treatment services. The current study failed to show that prior sexual abuse compromised short-term 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 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)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations22
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal on AddictionsSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207