Problematic Substance Use, Help-Seeking, and Service Utilization Trajectories among Seniors: An Exploratory Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problematic substance use has a significant impact on the health of a large proportion of people aged 65 years and older. Along with population growth, there is an increase in seniors enrolling for treatment in Québec (Canada). This study explores the perspectives of older adults related to their substance use experiences, help-seeking and utilization of addiction treatment services. In-depth interviews were conducted with 11 seniors receiving addiction treatment in two area in Québec. Thematic analysis highlight that seniors' experiences, life contexts, and social participation influence their substance use. Help-seeking process can be triggered by realizing the extent of substance use, while barriers and facilitators shape this experience. Utilization of addiction treatment services was mainly perceived positively. Several characteristics and components of services enable seniors to have positive experiences. Substance use can be employed as an adaptation strategy to get through hardships or ease loneliness and boredom. Talking to people, such as family, friends or professionals, is important to older adults' developing trust and engaging in a process to change substance use habits. Based upon these results, clinical recommendations to take into account the complex needs of seniors seeking treatment and related to their social environment are formulated.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".