Motivations That Maintain Substance Use Among Individuals With Psychotic Disorders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study quantitatively examined reasons for substance use among individuals with psychotic disorders and explored the relationship of these reasons to substance use problems and dependence. Sixty-nine people with psychotic disorders were interviewed using a battery of questionnaires called the Substance Use Scale for Psychosis (SUSP). Symptoms and medication side effects were also measured. A factor analysis revealed similar motives for substance use (mostly alcohol and cannabis use) as in the general population: "enhancement," "social motives," "coping with unpleasant affect," and "conformity and acceptance." A fifth factor, "relief of positive symptoms and side effects," demonstrated limited reliability. "Coping" and "enhancement" motives were found to lead to substance use problems and dependence. Mediator analysis indicated that worse symptoms lead to stronger motives for substance use, which in turn lead to stronger psychological dependence on that substance. These findings have the potential to inform effective treatment for substance use in psychosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it