MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4242070714 · doi:10.21203/rs.2.15929/v1

Integrating brief alcohol interventions with tobacco addictions treatment in primary care: qualitative study of health care practitioner perceptions

2019· preprint· en· W4242070714 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nadia Minian, Aliya Noormohamed, Mathangee Lingam, Laurie Zawertailo, Bernard Le Foll, Jürgen Rehm, Norman Giesbrecht, Andriy V. Samokhvalov, Dolly Baliunas, Peter Selby

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research Institute
KeywordsPsychological interventionPrimary careAddictionQualitative researchPerceptionPrimary health careMedicineHealth carePsychologyNursingPsychiatryEnvironmental healthFamily medicinePolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Randomized trials of complex interventions are increasingly including qualitative components to further understand factors that contribute to the success of complex interventions. In this paper, we explore the experiences of health care professionals who participated in the COMBAT trial; a web-based intervention implemented in the Ontario-wide Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients (STOP) Program to prompt primary care practitioner delivery of a brief alcohol intervention as part of a smoking cessation program. This study conducted qualitative interviews with primary care practitioners to understand the factors influencing implementation and acceptability of the intervention. Methods Twenty three primary care practitioners were selected for a qualitative interview using intensity sampling, ensuring representation across study arms, organization types, and rates of intervention delivery. Interviews were 45 to 90 minutes in length and conducted by phone using an interview guide that was informed the National Implementation Research Network’s Hexagon tool. Interview recordings were transcribed and coded iteratively between three researchers to achieve consensus on emerging themes. Results Most interviewed practitioners recognized the need to simultaneously address risky alcohol use and tobacco use, and shared that this type of work fits within the priorities of their respective clinics. Although most practitioners were knowledgeable about the evidence of health risks associated with dual alcohol and tobacco use, most still felt they could have benefited from additional training – beyond the two webinars delivered by the STOP program – prior to the launch of the COMBAT initiative. Practitioners acknowledged the value of adding a validated screening tool to the STOP program’s baseline questionnaire; however, following through with a brief intervention and referral to treatment proved challenging due to limited time. Conclusions While practitioners recognized the value of the COMBAT initiative, insufficient training and time were frequently reported as barriers to adoption and delivery. The results of the study also show that practitioners’ beliefs were reflective of the current social norms around alcohol use and this influenced their decision to offer a brief alcohol intervention to patients. Future designs of primary care-based interventions need emphasize organizational and sociocultural factors as part of the design.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→