Substance use disorders and racial/ethnic minorities matter: A meta-analytic examination of the relation between alliance and outcome.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this meta analysis was to examine the moderating impact of substance use disorder as inclusion/exclusion criterion as well as the percentage of racial/ethnic minorities on the strength of the alliance-outcome relationship in psychotherapy. It was hypothesized that the presence of a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) Axis I substance use disorder as a criterion and the presence of racial/ethnic minorities as a sociocultural indicator are moderately correlated client factors reducing the relationship between alliance and outcome. A random effects restricted maximum-likelihood estimator was used for omnibus and moderator models (k = 94). The presence of (a) substance use disorder and (b) racial/ethnic minorities (overall and specific to African Americans) partially moderated the alliance-outcome correlation. The percentage of substance use disorders and racial/ethnic minority status was unexpectedly highly correlated in the present treatment research samples. Sociocultural contextual variables should be considered along with a DSM Axis I diagnosis of substance use disorders in analyzing and interpreting therapy process variables such as the alliance.
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 | 0.013 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".