MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2782591547 · doi:10.2196/resprot.7650

A Shared Decision-Making Tool to Prevent Substance Abuse: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2018· article· en· W2782591547 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ju Long, Juntao Michael Yuan, Ron Kim Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)MedicineComputer sciencePsychologyAlternative medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorder (SUD) affects over 20 million adults and costs over $700 billion annually in the United States. It is one the greatest health care challenges we face. OBJECTIVE: This research project seeks to enhance the standard practice of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) through a mobile solution easily incorporated into primary care that will promote shared decision making and increase referral and adherence to specialty care through continued follow-up care. METHODS: This research will conduct an Office of Management and Budget (OMB)-approved randomized controlled trial (RCT) in primary care and SUD specialty service providers. The RCT will recruit a total of 500 SUD patients. Recruited patients will be randomized into control and intervention arms. Both arms will take initial baseline and exit (30 days) surveys to evaluate self-reported substance use and specialty service utilization. The control arm patients will receive usual care. The intervention group patients will receive technology-enhanced SBIRT and a mobile follow-up program to track goals and substance use at home. The RCT tracks participants for 30 days after the primary care encounter. We will collect feedback from the patients during the 30 days and count the number of patients who use specialty care services in specialty care programs for tobacco, alcohol, and drug abuse (both from self-reporting and from the service providers). RESULTS: RCT and data collection are underway. We expect to report the data results in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: We expect that significantly more intervention group patients will receive specialty SUD care within 30 days following the SBIRT encounter at the primary care clinic compared to the control group. We also expect that the intervention group patients will report a greater reduction in substance use and a greater drop in Drug Abuse Screening Test and Addition Severity Index scores within 30 days.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.008
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1370.017

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.395 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→