Effectiveness and appropriateness of culturally adapted approaches to treating alcohol use disorders in Indigenous people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to investigate the effectiveness and appropriateness of culturally adapted approaches for treating alcohol use disorders in Indigenous peoples in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the USA. INTRODUCTION: Poor and disadvantaged people, particularly those who are Indigenous, suffer more health effects due to alcohol misuse and are therefore subject to more law enforcement actions. Analyses have identified strategies for improving health services for Indigenous people; chief among these is culturally safe care specifically tailored to the context. Alcohol addiction is a chronic relapsing condition that usually requires ongoing treatment, so it is vital that treatment therapies are appropriate, meaningful, and effective. Many evidence-based therapies for substance abuse have not been specifically designed for or tested in Indigenous and First Nations communities. This absence of cultural considerations may be a contributor to the failure of these programs to engage with clients and successfully influence their behavior. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider qualitative and quantitative studies of any methodology, published in any language after 1998. Studies including adult and/or adolescent participants in inpatient or outpatient alcohol treatment programs described as being adapted to meet cultural needs will be considered. METHODS: This review will use the convergent segregated approach to mixed methods reviews. A range of databases will be searched, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO. Two reviewers will critically appraise and extract data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Qualitative research findings will, where possible, be pooled using JBI SUMARI with the meta-aggregation approach, and quantitative studies will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analysis using JBI SUMARI. The JBI convergent segregated approach to mixed methods reviews will be followed.
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 | 0.012 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".