MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092510854 · doi:10.1080/15332560802108597

Clinical Characteristics of Alcohol Drinking and Acculturation Issues Faced by Korean Immigrants in the United States

2008· article· en· W2092510854 on OpenAlexaff
Sung Hyun Yun, Wansoo Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcculturationImmigrationAlcohol consumptionFirst generationAlcohol abuseMental healthPsychologyAlcoholGerontologyMedicineEnvironmental healthClinical psychologyPolitical sciencePsychiatryLawPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Koreans in the United States can be grouped based on their diverse immigration histories and levels of acculturation: 1st-generation (Il-Sei), 1.5 generation (Il-Jom-O-Sei), 2nd-generation (Yi-Sei), 3rd-generation (Sam-Sei), and so on. Generational differences often account for different norms and behaviors regarding alcohol consumption. Difficulties for 1st-generation Koreans arise when seeking treatment for mental health and alcohol or substance abuse problems because of language barriers and cultural differences. The purpose of this study is to explore the characteristics of alcohol consumption by Il-Sei Koreans who were born, raised, and educated in Korea and immigrated to the United States after age 18. Immigration stress, Korean drinking norms and traditions, the influence of Confucianism, acculturation, availability of Korean alcohol, and health treatment disparity issues are addressed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social Work Practice in the AddictionsSame topicNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorFrench-language works237,207