MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739544553 · doi:10.4103/0253-7176.211757

Relationship of Anger with Alcohol use Treatment Outcome: Follow-up Study

2017· article· en· W2739544553 on OpenAlexaff
Manoj Kumar Sharma, L. N. Suman, Pratima Murthy, P Marimuthu

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Psychological Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngerAlcoholPsychiatryOutcome (game theory)AddictionPsychologyClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anger is seen as comorbid condition in psychiatric conditions. It has an impact on one's quality of life. It leads to variation in the treatment outcome. The present study is going to explore the relationship of anger with treatment outcome among alcohol users after 1 year of treatment. The data for the present study were taken from the project work on correlates of anger among alcohol users, funded by center for addiction medicine, NIMHANS, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 100 males (50 alcohol-dependent and 50 abstainers) in the age range of 20-45 years with a primary diagnosis of alcohol dependence were taken for the study. They were administered a semi-structured interview schedule to obtain information about sociodemographic details, information about alcohol use, its relationship with anger and its effects on anger control and the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. RESULTS: 68% of the dependent and abstainers perceived anger as negative emotion and 76% in control perceived it as negative. The presence of significant difference was seen for relapsers group in relation to trait anger and state anger. The group who remained abstinent from the intake to follow-up differs significantly from the dependent group in relation to state anger and anger control out. Mean score was higher on trait anger for the dependent group. CONCLUSIONS: It has implication for anger management intervention/matching of treatment with users attributes and helping the users to develop the behavioral repertoires to manage anger.

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)0.003
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.254
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Psychological MedicineSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207