SHORT-TERM RECOVERY FROM ALCOHOL ABUSE OR DEPENDENCE: ANY EVIDENCE OF A RELATIONSHIP WITH TREATMENT USE IN A GENERAL POPULATION SAMPLE?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To test whether survey respondents who report alcohol misuse in the past year are more likely to be abstinent or binge-free in the past 30 days if they have used treatment, than if they have not. METHODS: Analysis of data from the 2002 US National Survey on Drug Use and Health was obtained. RESULTS: A total of 5730 respondents scored positive for alcohol abuse or dependence in the preceding year. Fewer than 10% had used any treatment for alcohol or drugs in this period, but this was associated with a 10% increase in the past-month abstinence and past-month binge-free drinking compared with respondents who did not access treatment. Such an apparent short-term recovery appeared greater in those whose treatment had been received in a formal treatment setting, a doctor's office, or in self-help groups than in the emergency room or in prison. CONCLUSIONS: Even if part of the association between treatment and recent abstinence and non-binge drinking was causal, indicating that treatment has some impact, it is a pathway chosen only by the minority.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".