Aspects of control and substance use among middle‐aged and older adults with bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High prevalence rates of alcohol and substance use disorders have been reported among persons with bipolar disorder (BD). In the present study, we explored the daily experiences of middle-aged and older adults living with BD who reported regular substance use and the ways in which participants expressed 'control' in relation to their use of alcohol and other substances. Semistructured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 12 participants (nine women and three men), aged 36-57 years of age (mean = 49 years). Thematic analyses identified emergent themes and patterns in participants' life histories. The theme of 'control' emerged as central to participants' reports, and was organized into four categories: (i) substance use to control BD symptoms; (ii) substance use provides a sense of being in control; (iii) methods of controlled substance use; and (iv) not having control: overreliance on substances. Implications of the present study include the need for nurses to openly discuss the use of alcohol and other drugs with persons with BD, provide health information and screening, and determine whether persons with BD feel they have control over their substance use. Several lines of research with persons who have BD and use substances are suggested.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".