MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943346385 · doi:10.1097/cxa.0000000000000020

PAUSE: The Development and Implementation of a Novel Brief Intervention Program Targeting Cannabis and Alcohol Use Among University Students

2018· article· en· W2943346385 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jillian Halladay, Allan Fein, James MacKillop, Catharine Munn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Addiction · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonEmergent BioSolutions (Canada)McMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotivational interviewingCannabisMental healthBrief interventionPsychological interventionMedicineIntervention (counseling)PsychiatryAnxietyReferralPsychologyClinical psychologyHarm reductionFamily medicinePublic healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives: Studies on brief interventions (BIs) for substance misuse among university students indicate their effectiveness for alcohol use, however, programs have rarely addressed cannabis use and comorbid mental health symptoms. This paper describes the development and implementation of a manualized single-session BI called PAUSE, based on motivational interviewing (MI) and harm reduction principles, designed to address alcohol and cannabis misuse and concurrent mental health concerns among university students on a mid-sized university campus. Methods: Participants were recruited by self-referral and professional referral. Interested participants completed an online assessment followed by a 45- to 90-minute in-person MI session with a trained counsellor. Results: A total of 46 (61% male) students attended a PAUSE session; 54.5% attended for cannabis. Fifty percent of individuals were referred from counsellors or physicians. Ninety-five percent of the samples were engaging in problematic cannabis use and/or moderate to high-risk alcohol use and 80% were identified as being at risk for an anxiety or depressive disorder. Patients and staff responded favorably to the intervention in narrative feedback. No adverse events occurred. Conclusions: PAUSE appears to be a feasible and promising BI to address postsecondary students at high risk for cannabis and alcohol use disorders, who frequently have concurrent mental health concerns. Further studies using randomized, controlled designs, and mixed methods with longitudinal follow-up are necessary. Objectifs: Les études sur les interventions brèves (BIs) pour la toxicomanie chez les étudiants universitaires indiquent leur efficacité pour la consommation d’alcool, mais les programmes ont rarement abordé la consommation de cannabis et les symptômes de santé mentale concomitante. Cet article décrit le développement et la mise en œuvre d’une BI à session unique appelée Pause, basée sur des principes d’entrevue motivationnelle (MI) et de réduction des risques, visant à lutter contre l’abus d’alcool et de cannabis et les problèmes de santé mentale concomitants chez les étudiants universitaires d’un campus universitaire de grosseur moyenne. Méthodes: Les participants ont été recrutés par auto-référence et référence professionnelle. Les participants intéressés ont complété une évaluation en ligne suivie d’une séance d’MI de 45 à 90 minutes en présence d’un conseiller qualifié. Résultats: 46 étudiants (61% d’hommes) ont assisté à une session PAUSE; 54,5% étaient présents pour le cannabis. 50% des personnes ont été référées par des conseillers ou des médecins. 95% de l’échantillon se livraient à une consommation problématique de cannabis et / ou à une consommation d’alcool modérée à élevée et 80% étaient identifiés comme étant à risque de développer un trouble anxieux ou dépressif. Les patients et le personnel ont répondu favorablement à l’intervention dans la rétroaction narrative. Aucun événement indésirable n’est survenu. Conclusions: La PAUSE semble être une intervention brève réalisable et prometteuse pour les étudiants de niveau poste-secondaire à risque élevé de troubles liés au cannabis et à l’alcool, qui ont souvent des problèmes de santé mentale concomitants. D’autres études utilisant des modèles contrôlés randomisés et des méthodes mixtes avec suivi longitudinal sont nécessaires.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of AddictionSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207