MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974085533 · doi:10.1108/ijmhsc-11-2018-0075

Alcohol use disorders among Myanmar migrant workers in Thailand

2019· article· en· W2974085533 on OpenAlexaff
Deivi Gaitan, Valerie Daw Tin Shwe, Predrag Bajcevic, Anita J. Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Migration Health and Social Care · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthMigrant workersMedicineAlcoholIntervention (counseling)DemographyGerontologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to determine the prevalence of Alcohol Use Disorders (AUDs) among Myanmar male migrant workers (> 15 years) living in Mae Sot, Thailand, and their patterns of drinking. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional survey was administered to 512 participants to measure AUDs and drinking patterns. ANOVA and χ2 analyses were performed to assess demographic differences between abstainers, harmful and hazardous drinkers (HHDs) (those showing signs of AUDs) and non-harmful drinkers. Findings Results showed that 12.3 percent of male Myanmar migrants were HHDs, a rate only slightly higher than in Thai men (9.1 percent), but much higher than in men still living in Myanmar (2.7 percent) (WHO, 2014). Also, 19 percent of alcohol-consuming Myanmar male migrant workers reported patterns of heavy episodic drinking, which is markedly higher than in alcohol-consuming Thai (4.7 percent) and Myanmar men (1.5 percent) (WHO, 2014). Originality/value Given the health risks associated with AUDs and heavy episodic drinking, the findings of this study suggest a need for appropriate alcohol-related health education and intervention for Myanmar male migrant workers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Migration Health and Social CareSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207