Need for women-centered treatment for substance use disorders: results from focus group discussions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are few women-centered treatment programs for substance use disorder. We therefore undertook an exploratory study to better understand the treatment experience, barriers, and facilitators of mothers with substance use disorder. METHODS: We conducted two focus groups with a total of ten women with a history of substance use disorder in Kingston (Canada). Women were recruited from a community program for mothers with substance use disorder. The focus groups were recorded, and the resulting data were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed. Barriers, facilitators and treatment needs were identified. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 31.1 years, 30% were currently using substances, and 60% had a child in their care. A key concern for women regarding substance use treatment was the welfare of their child(ren). Agencies charged with child protection were a barrier to treatment because women feared disclosing substance use would result in loss of child custody. In contrast, when agencies stipulated that women must attend treatment to retain custody, they facilitated treatment engagement. Other barriers to treatment included identifying treatment programs and completing admission requirements, wait times, counselor ability to address woman-centered issues, fear, safety, and stigma. Women's personal motivation for treatment was a facilitator. Suggestions to improve treatment programs included to allow children to accompany their mothers, involvement of peer support, and women-only programs. CONCLUSIONS: This small but novel study provides important data to inform treatment programming for mothers with substance use disorders.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it