The Use of Antidepressant Medications in Substance Abuse Treatment: The Public-Private Distinction, Organizational Compatibility, and the Environment
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies of innovation adoption in health care organizations focus either on organizational characteristics or the institutional environment, but not both. Furthermore, these perspectives are rarely employed simultaneously in both public and private health care organizations. This research considers the public-private distinction, organizational compatibility, and interorganizational referral relationships in the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) by substance abuse treatment organizations. Using data from nationally representative samples of 363 publicly funded and 403 privately funded substance abuse treatment centers, a four-category typology of public and private organizations initially predicted variation in SSRI use. However some differences were no longer significant once organizational and environmental characteristics were added to the statistical model. These data support hypotheses about the associations between organizational characteristics and SSRI use as well as hypotheses regarding the external environment. Future research should continue to integrate both internal and external factors in theoretical explanations of innovation adoption.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it