Experiences of Kratom Users: A Qualitative Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a psychoactive plant that has been used since at least 1836 in folk medicine in Southeast Asian countries. More recently, kratom has become widely available in the West and is used for both recreational and medicinal purposes. There has, however, been little scientific research into the short- and long-term effects of kratom in humans, and much of the information available is anecdotal. To supplement the increasing scientific understanding of kratom's pharmacology and research into its effects in animals, we report the results of a qualitative analysis of first-hand descriptions of human kratom use that were submitted to, and published by, a psychoactive substance information website (Erowid.org). Themes that emerged from these experience reports indicate that kratom may be useful for analgesia, mood elevation, anxiety reduction, and may aid opioid withdrawal management. Negative response themes also emerged, indicating potential problems and unfavorable "side" effects, especially stomach upset and vomiting. Based on our analyses, we present preliminary hypotheses for future examination in controlled, quantitative studies of kratom.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it