Emerging Adults Post Discharge from Residential Treatment: Subgroup Profiles of Substance Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The outcomes of youth who accessed Residential Treatment are varied; many do not fare well in early adulthood. The purpose for this report was to compare subgroups of substance use behavior among emerging adults who had accessed RT as a child/adolescent on life domains and symptoms gathered by interviews and gleaned from agency files. Of the 59 emerging adults, 11 were categorized as having persistent substance use, 19 as moderate use and 26 as no/minimal use. The mean age at the time of the interview was 19.96 years (SD 1.84), and most (n= 33; 61%) were male. By discharge, the persistent substance use group had significantly greater impairment in functioning in school, home, and self-harm subscales and overall functioning than the other two groups. Fewer participants in the persistent group were employed as emerging adults, and a greater number were self-medicating compared to the other two groups. These results suggest that youth who accessed RT with substance use concerns continue to have difficulties as emerging adults with functioning, symptom severity and life domains. An exploration of specialized programs to address these difficulties appears warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".