Keltoi client evaluation study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Keltoi is a therapeutic residential facility within the Eastern region of the Health \nService Executive (HSE) that uses an innovative systemic model to provide an 8 \nweek rehabilitation programme for former drug users. This report describes the \nresults of a follow-up evaluation survey of 94 successive clients who attended the \nprogramme and who were between 1-and 3-years post-discharge. \n100 attendees of the Keltoi programme who were (minimum) 1-year postcompletion \nof the residential component of their treatment agreed to take part \nin the study, whereby the four page Maudsley Addiction Profile (MAP) was \ncompleted, as was a short qualitative interview. The cohort was recruited on a \ntemporal basis; the first study participant was discharged on 18 November \n2002, the one hundredth was discharged on 30 August 2004. This is a nonrandom \ncross-sectional field-study of a sample of 67% (100/150) of the total \nnumber of Keltoi clients to that date. \nOf the 80 clients on whose responses analysis was carried out, 51% were \nabstinent from all illicit drugs and alcohol in 30 days pre-interview; 60% were \nabstinent from all illicit drugs but had consumed alcohol in the 30 day \npreinterview period; and 65% were abstinent from all substances excluding \nalcohol and cannabis in the same period. Of the 40% of individuals who were \nusing substances other than alcohol, only five (5.4%) were injecting drugs. \nCross-sectional outcomes are also presented with respect to crime, health and \nrisk behaviours, social and personal functioning and employment. In general, \nabstinent clients (including those who were abstinent excluding alcohol) \nreported minimal criminal activity and positive outcomes in relation to the \nother measures.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".