MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768647540 · doi:10.28931/riiad.2016.2.05

Intervención de la familia al inicio del tratamiento, según la experiencia de jóvenes usuarios de drogas

2016· article· es· W2768647540 on OpenAlexaff
David Bruno Díaz-Negrete, Nancy Leticia Castillo-Vite, José Luis Chacón Moreno, Sara Elisa Gracia-Gutiérrez de Velasco, Carmen Fernández-Cáceres

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Internacional de Investigación en Adicciones · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth, Drugs, and Violence
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: drug abuse has a wide impact in family, affecting the health of its members, the quality of their relations, and economic situation and social integration of the family as a whole. Several ways of coping have been identified, depending on the style of parenting and on the incidence of a dominant discourse that permeates family practices and stories with a narrative of stigma and exclusion. Objective: to analyze the content of the experience reported by young drug users about the intervention of their families at the begging of treatment. Method: qualitative study based on a casuistic and thematic analysis of narrative-biographical interviews conducted with a sample of 11 young drug users in treatment. Results: two narratives of family intervention were identified: stories relating to disciplinary and repressive actions that can reach high levels of violence, and, less frequently, stories of family support grouped into two categories, emotional and practical-informative support. Discussion and conclusions: family intervention related with drug use and treatment may be interpreted in terms of the exercise of a “positional” control in the family and of a collectivist culture, dominated by parental authoritarism and a lack of emotional support.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Internacional de Investigación en AdiccionesSame topicYouth, Drugs, and ViolenceFrench-language works237,207