MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121457630 · doi:10.1080/08897077.2020.1867288

Dismantling Racism Against Black, Indigenous, and People of Color across the Substance use Continuum: A Position Statement of the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance use and Addiction

2021· article· en· W3121457630 on OpenAlexaff
Holly Hagle, Marlene Martín, Rachel Winograd, Jessica S. Merlin, Deborah S. Finnell, Jeffrey Bratberg, Adam J. Gordon, Cheyenne Johnson, Sharon Levy, Doreen MacLane-Baeder, Rebecca Northup, Zoe Weinstein, Paula J. Lum

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Abuse · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRacismHealth equitySubstance useEquity (law)IndigenousInclusion (mineral)CriminologyAddictionSociologyMentorshipPsychologyMedicineSocial psychologyPolitical scienceMedical educationPublic healthPsychiatryGender studiesNursingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance Use and Addiction (AMERSA) acknowledges that racism profoundly affects persons who use alcohol and other drugs. Racism's deadly effects compounded with other social determinants of health result in a cascade of negative impacts. The AMERSA Board of Directors (BOD) proposes an initial set of strategies to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion using a framework that speaks to four key AMERSA experiences: engagement, education, mentorship, and leadership. Through these strategies, AMERSA commits to promoting equity and inclusion to dismantle the individual, institutional, and structural racism that has permeated the United States for centuries.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0140.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations43
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance AbuseSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207