MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143494072 · doi:10.1177/070674370304800103

Substance Use Disorders: Sex Differences and Psychiatric Comorbidities

2003· review· en· W2143494072 on OpenAlex

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComorbidityPsychiatrySubstance abusePsychiatric comorbidityDepression (economics)AnxietyMood disordersMedicineAddictionMoodNational Comorbidity SurveyClinical psychologySubstance usePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews sex differences in psychiatric comorbidity among individuals with substance use disorders and, in particular, the clinical significance of these differences for treatment outcome among women. METHOD: We undertook a computerized search of major health care databases. To enhance the search, we drew prior relevant articles from the reference list. RESULTS: Women with alcohol and other drug use disorders present higher rates of psychiatric comorbidity, particularly mood and anxiety disorders, than do men. Moreover, the comorbid diagnosis, particularly of depression, is more often primary in women, while in men the comorbidity is more often secondary to the substance abuse diagnosis. In addition, there is evidence that psychiatric comorbidity is associated with distinct, sex-specific outcomes for substance use treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Sex differences in the clinical presentation of substance-dependent individuals with psychiatric comorbidity present specific treatment challenges and opportunities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.237 · 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