Stresses, Strengths, and Experiences of Mothers Engaged in Methadone Maintenance Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) is the intervention of choice for addiction, unfortunately, mothers are less likely to engage in care. Greater understanding of how mothers experience the addiction and the recovery process is needed to develop strategies to effectively engage mothers in MMT. This mixed method study applied quantitative and qualitative approaches with a sample of 12 mothers who were engaged in MMT for 3 or more months. Although the results showed stresses of high depression and difficult life circumstance scores, the mothers had strengths that included positive social support and family functioning. Inductive analysis of transcribed interviews identified three themes that explained how mothers experienced addiction and recovery: diminished maternal identity, choice for mothering, and redefined maternal identity. During addiction, mothers described a sense of diminished maternal identity with two subthemes of diminished performed mothering and interrupted mothering. With the second theme, choice for mothering, mothers described making the choice to attend MMT for their children. The third theme, redefined maternal identity, consisted of two subthemes that reflected potential outcomes of MMT and addiction recovery. Whereas most mothers described positive, restored maternal identity, two mothers of older children noted continued diminished maternal identity with persistence of negative mother-child relationships despite maternal addiction recovery. Recommendations are made to assist service providers to consider maternal identity within the recovery process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".