MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015434985 · doi:10.1177/0193841x14567313

An Alternative Framework to Investigating and Understanding Intraindividual Processes in Substance Abuse Recovery

2015· article· en· W2015434985 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

VenueEvaluation Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomothetic and idiographicSubstance abuseCravingPsychologyAbstinenceAffect (linguistics)Clinical psychologyAddictionDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sustained recovery from substance abuse is a dynamic intraindividual-level process. OBJECTIVES: We argue that research on recovery process will benefit from a theoretical approach that captures both the dynamic and the idiographic nature of substance abuse recovery. In addition to setting out why we believe that research on recovery can benefit from such an approach, we provide a demonstration of idiographic within-individual analyses of between- and within-day associations among negative affect, substance use craving, and positive social experiences. DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: The data used were drawn from 39 abstinent young adults in 12-step recovery from substance abuse (mean age = 22.9, females = 12). Participants provided an average of 26.7 days of daily diary data by end-of-day collections. Unified first-order structural equation models were fit individually to predict daily levels of craving and negative affect from the previous day's same two variables as well as from both the previous day's and the same day's positive social experiences. RESULTS: Model estimates demonstrated substantial interindividual heterogeneity in their day-to-day associations in both direction and magnitude, highlighting the importance of applying idiographic approach to understanding recovery. Cluster analyses were subsequently applied to individual model estimates to identify homogeneous subgroups that demonstrated similar day-to-day association patterns, revealing two distinct subgroups that appeared to manage daily abstinence through different mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: The idiographic approach presented provides the potential value of framing recovery as an idiosyncratic dynamic process and provides targets for tailored and adaptive treatment and recovery supporting intervention in future design and evaluation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.285
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.143 · 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