MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147213052 · doi:10.3109/10826084.2010.501675

Quality of Life, Needs, and Interest Among Cocaine Users: Differences by Cocaine Use Intensity and Lifetime Severity of Addiction to Cocaine

2010· article· en· W2147213052 on OpenAlexaff
C.C. Morales-Manrique, Anita Palepu, M. Castellano-Gómez, Rafael Aleixandre‐Benavent, Cocaine Group Comunidad Valenciana, Juan Carlos Valderrama‐Zurián

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use & Misuse · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAddictionQuality of life (healthcare)Cocaine dependenceLogistic regressionCocaine usePsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineInternal medicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the quality of life (QoL) of 149 patients who were recruited in 2005 at outpatient treatment centers for cocaine dependence in Spain. Important life areas and life areas with potential need and interest to change in order to improve the QoL were analyzed in terms of patients? cocaine use intensity within the previous six months and lifetime severity addiction to cocaine. The Spanish versions of the Drug User Quality of Life Scale and the Lifetime Severity Index for Cocaine were used to measure QoL, needs and interest, and severity addiction to cocaine. The data analysis employed t-tests, linear regression, Mann?Whitney U tests, multivariate regression, and chi-square tests. Tailoring treatment programs to address the life areas that are considered relevant to cocaine users considering their intensity of consumption and lifetime severity addiction to cocaine may improve retention and treatment outcomes. Further research needs to consider patients of different ethnic backgrounds and cultural contexts. The study's limitations are noted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Use & MisuseSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207