Review of third-wave therapies for substance use disorders in people of color and collectivist cultures: Current evidence and future directions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In people of color (POC) and from collectivist cultures, third-wave therapies utilizing mindfulness may be a more sensitive approach to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, than cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). This systematic review examined this hypothesis. METHOD: We searched PsycINFO, Pubmed, and MEDLINE on December 23, 2021. Articles were included if they compared efficacy of third-wave therapies to therapies with only CBT elements and reported treatment outcomes for POC/people from collectivist cultures. RESULTS: = 2) to measure substance use. Overall, eight studies reported greater improvements in the third-wave therapy group relative to the CBT group in POC, on at least one substance use outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that relative to CBT, third-wave therapies are a promising modality in the treatment SUDs in POC and people and from collectivist cultures. However, studies are relatively sparse and carry a number of methodological problems. As such, there remains a need for further research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".