Satisfaction of Family Members with Treatment in Psychosocial Care Services on Alcohol and Other Drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To assess the satisfaction of family members who had relatives in Psychosocial Care Services on Alcohol and Other Drugs (CAPSad) and the variables associated with the score of satisfaction.Method: Evaluative, cross-sectional, descriptive, and exploratory research. Data collection was performed with the SATIS-BR instrument, which had been validated for use in Brazil, and sampling was performed by simple randomization, according to a pilot study. The Ethics Research Committee (Protocol 1,001/2011) approved this study. Independent variables included socioeconomic characteristics about the participation of the person at CAPSad and the mean global score of Scale of Perceived Change (SPC); the dependent variable was overall satisfaction. Regression testing was performed using the method of ordinary least squares.Results: In the multivariate analysis, the overall score variables of SPC and family members monitoring to Psychosocial Care Services were positively correlated with overall satisfaction (p ≤ .05).Conclusions: The most family members with relatives receiving services from CAPSad were satisfied. Knowledge of the factors correlated with increased satisfaction might enable the construction of action plans aimed to include the family, during the care process, in these services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".