MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using thought mapping and structured stories to decrease HIV risk behaviors among cocaine injectors and crack smokers in the South of Brazil

2007· article· en· W2009629558 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Psychiatry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)CondomHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Crack cocaineClinical psychologySexual behaviorPsychologyStructural equation modelingMedicinePsychiatryFamily medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in AIDS knowledge and risk behaviors among Brazilian cocaine users in an intervention trial. METHOD: 119 participants were randomly assigned to either a standard or a standard plus "thought mapping" intervention, and re-interviewed 2 and 8 weeks after intake using standardized data collection instruments. Intervention effects were examined using generalized estimated equation model. RESULTS: Significant increases in AIDS knowledge and condom use were observed in the experimental group, as well as significant changes in the subscores for sexual and drug risks. The experimental intervention was less successful in decreasing mean days of cocaine use when compared to the standard. CONCLUSION: Although not robust, the findings nevertheless suggest that components of the experimental thought-mapping model might be useful in combination with other approaches.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.285 · 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