Life in Recovery from Addiction in Canada: Examining Gender Pathways with a Focus on the Female Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first Life in Recovery (LIR) from Addiction survey in Canada showed that individuals experience various pathways to recovery. The current study examines the recovery experiences among adult females with data from the 2016 Canadian LIR survey, with a focus on two well-established predictors of female substance use disorders, namely, family violence and mental health, for their impact on the recovery journey. Reasons for starting recovery varied by females and males, as a higher proportion of females (70.2%) reported their mental health as a factor for wanting to start recovery compared to males (64.7%). Moreover, females reported greater untreated mental health or emotional concerns during addiction compared to males, p = .003, as well as greater family violence during recovery, p = .02 and addiction, p < .001. In terms of informal supports, females are more likely to use technology as a recovery support, p < .05, are more likely to connect with a pet or other animal, p = .001, and are more likely to use art, poetry, writing, p = .007, and yoga, p < .001, as part of their recovery journey compared to males. These findings reveal females’ unique addiction and recovery experiences and highlight the importance of considering gender implications, particularly for mental health and family violence, during the journey of addiction and recovery.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".