MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W206357307 · doi:10.1186/1940-0640-7-s1-a24

Back to the future: a very brief history of brief interventions

2012· article· en· W206357307 on OpenAlex
Jim McCambridge, John Cunningham, Kypros Kypri

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

VenueAddiction Science & Clinical Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth psychologyPsychological interventionPublic healthHistory of psychologyPsychologyPsychotherapistMedicinePsychoanalysisPsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This presentation is part of a larger study regarding the history of ideas about drinking alcohol and how it may be influenced, focusing on the evolution of thinking about brief intervention (BI). The early history of the BI field is reviewed, and consideration is given as to how key ideas were developed and the contemporaneous influences upon those ideas. Ideas about what constitutes BI and the nature and prominence of the facilitation of self-change have changed over time. Three seminal studies are reviewed in depth, comprising the first trial, the first review, and the most cited BI study. It is possible to anticipate future trends in BI research by examining the past. The development of the internet has important implications for BI, which, to some extent, calls upon earlier ways of thinking.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.653
GPT teacher head0.698
Teacher spread0.045 · 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