MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4287433353

[First Episode Psychosis and Substance Use Disorder: Narrative Review of Best Practices and Adapted Approaches for Assessment and Monitoring].

2021· article· en· W4287433353 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosisMotivational interviewingPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)PsychiatryPsychologyClinical psychologySubstance abuseSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives About half of young adults with early psychosis also have substance use disorders (SUD). For young adults with first episode psychosis (FEP), the persistence of SUD negatively impacts the symptomatic and functional outcome as well as the management of the problems. This article aims to identify and synthetize the best therapeutic approaches for the treatment of young adults with concurrent disorders (FEP and SUD) and to present avenues for practical and adapted approaches for the assessment and follow-up of people with concurrent FEP and SUD. Method Narrative literature review on the treatment of young adults with concurrent disorder (FEP and SUD). Results Several studies demonstrate the usefulness of early intervention for psychosis services (EIS) in the management of SUD with approximately 50% decrease in SUD during the first year of follow-up. A variety of therapeutic interventions have been studied, but none have demonstrated substantial long-term superiority over the standard treatment offered in EIS. The studies also have several methodological limitations. To date, clinical guidelines suggest offering an adapted and integrated treatment for psychosis and SUD and recommend the use of various approaches such as case management, comprehensive assessment and feedback on SUD and psychosis as well as their interplay, harm reduction interventions, motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioural therapy, and pharmacotherapy. It is proposed here to proactively adjust the treatment to consider the severity of the disorders, their impact on the various dimensions of psychosis outcomes, the developmental stage of the young person and his or her stage of change with respect to substance use. Conclusion Data on best practice in the treatment of concurrent PEP-SUD disorders are relatively limited. Some approaches appear to have the potential to improve the clinical course of young people living with such conditions, especially if they are adapted to this population. Furthermore, research and innovations in the management of concurrent disorders must continue to offer better adapted care to young adults with early psychosis and SUD.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.148 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder→French-language works237,207→