MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514539970 · doi:10.5001/omj.2016.66

Pattern of Substance Use: Study in a De-addiction Clinic

2016· article· en· W2514539970 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Muntasir Maruf, Muhammad Zillur Rahman Khan, Nasim Jahan

Bibliographic record

VenueOman Medical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeer pressureAddictionSubstance usePsychiatrySubstance abusePopulationFamily medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Substance use disorders have become a major public health problem in Bangladesh. We sought to assess the pattern of substance use and related factors among hospitalized patients. METHODS: This was a descriptive study that included 105 patients. All patients who were admitted to a private drug de-addiction clinic in Dhaka, Bangladesh, between 1 July and 31 December 2013 and diagnosed with substance use disorder were enrolled in the study. Data was collected via face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire and the information was complemented by the case-notes. RESULTS: Almost all (90.5%) respondents were male and were poly-substance users (91.4%). The mean age of respondents was 28.8±8.0 years. Most (27.6%) respondents used three types of substances. Smoking or inhalation was the route used by most (90.5%) respondents. More than three-fourths (81.0%) of respondents used nicotine. Among the other substances, the majority (79.0%) used opioids, followed by cannabinoids (55.2%), and alcohol (41.0%). Curiosity, peer pressure, and for fun were identified as the common reasons for initiating substance use. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of poly-substance use was found in the study population. Our findings could help in the management and development of prevention strategies for substance use in Bangladesh.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOman Medical JournalSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207