MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037228626 · doi:10.1080/10826080902959884

Drugs and Aggression Readily Mix; So What Now?

2009· review· en· W2037228626 on OpenAlexaff
Robert O. Pihl, Rachel Sutton

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use & Misuse · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPsychologySocial psychologyCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robert O. Pihla* & Rachel Suttonaa Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada* Correspondence: Robert O. Pihl, Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, CanadaIntoxicated aggression is both a dangerous and a costly problem for society, with alcohol being involved in over 50% of violent crimes, and the cost of alcohol-consumption-related crime being estimated at $205 billion in the United States alone. First, the authors reviewed the substantial evidence for the connection between alcohol consumption and aggression, and then they examined the risk factors for this problem. These included societal/cultural factors, such as availability and alcohol expectancies, and individual factors, such as demographic characteristics, personality, comorbid disorders, individual differences in response to alcohol, and cognitive functioning. Finally, interventions were suggested focusing on policy, alcohol sellers, treatments for alcohol abuse and dependency, anger management, pharmacology, and low executive functioning. Further efforts are still needed to target interventions to specific risk factors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.010

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Use & MisuseSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207