MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290840549 · doi:10.1007/s11469-022-00841-x

Blended-eLearning Improves Alcohol Use Care in Kenya: Pragmatic Randomized Control Trial Results and Parallel Qualitative Study Implications

2022· article· en· W4290840549 on OpenAlexafffund
Veronic Clair, Abednego Musau, Victoria Mutiso, Albert Tele, Katlin Atkinson, Verena Rossa-Roccor, Edna Bosire, David M. Ndetei, Erica Frank

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGrand Challenges CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsHealth psychologyRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)Public healthMedicineQualitative researchIntervention (counseling)Stigma (botany)Health careAlcohol consumptionNursingEnvironmental healthAlcoholPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alcohol use is the 5th most important risk factor contributing to the global burden of diseases, with stigma and a lack of trained health workers as the main barriers to adequate care. This study assesses the impact of providing blended-eLearning courses teaching the alcohol, smoking, and substance involvement screening test (ASSIST) screening and its linked brief intervention (BI). In public and private facilities, two randomized control trials (RCTs) showed large and similar decreases in alcohol use in those receiving the BI compared to those receiving only the ASSIST feedback. Qualitative findings confirm a meaningful reduction in alcohol consumption; decrease in stigma and significant practice change, suggesting lay health workers and clinicians can learn effective interventions through blended-eLearning; and significantly improve alcohol use care in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) context. In addition, our study provides insight into why lay health workers feedback led to a similar decrease in alcohol consumption compared to those who also received a BI by clinicians. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11469-022-00841-x.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.390
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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mental Health and AddictionSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207