MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800061569 · doi:10.5206/uwomj.v86i2.2015

Why can’t patients last the wait?

2017· article· en· W2800061569 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicole A. Guitar

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Western Ontario Medical Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbstinencePsychological interventionMedicineSubstance misusePsychiatryMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One million people in North America are currently waiting for publicly funded substance use treatment. Unfortunately, long waiting times have been listed as the number one reason for not seeking treatment for substance use problems. While it is possible that successful abstinence during the waiting period convinces patients that they do not need treatment at all, more emphasis must be placed on interventions that can bridge the gap between initial contact by patients for substance use treatment and treatment intake. Recommendations in this review include: (1) decreasing the length of time between a patient’s initial contact for treatment and the pre-intake interview, (2) initiating regular phone contact with patients, and (3) decreasing resentful demoralization in patients who are ready for change but who are forced to wait for treatment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Western Ontario Medical JournalSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207