MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2170124852 · doi:10.7202/017797ar

[Process of change in patients with concurrent substance use - mental health problems].

2007· article· en· W2170124852 on OpenAlexaff
Didier Acier, Louise Nadeau, Michel Landry

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a retrospective study with a five year follow-up which examines the variations in substance use and the determinants of these variations. This exploratory research studied a sub-sample of 22 participants, selected from an initial sample of 197 patients with concurrent substance use and other mental health disorders. At the quantitative level, the statistical analysis shows an improvement in the problematic use of alcohol and drugs but no change in psychological state, health, family and interpersonals relations, as well as employment. At the qualitative level, the analysis of the participant's subjective view indicates that the two main elements of progression in substance use are the effects and the availability of substances. The main elements of reduction in substance use are the use of services, the personal techniques developed by participants, the family network, physical health, lack of financial resources, "occupational" activities, and a process of maturation.

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)0.010
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→