MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012585224

Perspectiva crítica de la familia y de personas cercanas sobre factores de riesgo familiares y comunitarios en el uso de drogas ilícitas en San José, Costa Rica

2009· article· en· W2012585224 on OpenAlexaff
Mabell Granados Hernández, Bruna Brands, Edward M. Adlaf, Norman Giesbrecht, Laura Simich, Maria da Glória Miotto Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En este estudio se presentan los resultados de una investigación cuantitativa, parte de un estudio multicéntrico, cuyo objetivo fue describir las perspectivas que tienen la familia y las personas cercanas a usuarios de drogas ilícitas, cuestionándose sobre cuáles serían los factores de riesgo familiar y comunitario que contribuyen a la adicción de drogas ilícitas. Se encuestó a 100 sujetos mayores de 18 años, familiares o personas cercanas a sujetos que han estado usado drogas ilícitas. Se encontró que la mayoría eran hombres, con edad promedio de 27.3 años. Los factores de riesgo provenientes de la familia identificados fueron: ser rechazado 99%, sentirse no amado 98%, falta de comunicación 95%, conflictos y violencia familiar 95%. Los factores sociales o comunitarios fueron: 99% tener amigos que usan drogas, 99% presión de los amigos, 93% vivir en un área insegura y 94% experimentar un evento estresante. Se concluyó, según su perspectiva crítica, que se debe trabajar más sobre las estrategias de prevención de factores de riesgo tanto en la familia como en la comunidad.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207