MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312194865 · doi:10.1038/s41572-022-00406-1

Hazardous drinking and alcohol use disorders

2022· review· en· W4312194865 on OpenAlexafffund
James MacKillop, Roberta Agabio, Sarah W. Feldstein Ewing, Markus Heilig, John F. Kelly, Lorenzo Leggio, Anne Lingford‐Hughes, Abraham A. Palmer, Charles Parry, Lara A. Ray, Jürgen Rehm

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Reviews Disease Primers · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthHomewood Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
FundersCilagJanssen PharmaceuticalsNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaNational Institutes of HealthSouth African Medical Research CouncilH. Lundbeck A/SPfizerVetenskapsrådetKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseIndiviorNational Institute on Drug AbuseBrainsWayGovernment of the United KingdomServier
KeywordsBiopsychosocial modelPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)Public healthImpulsivityPsychologyAlcohol use disorderPsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologyAlcohol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alcohol is one of the most widely consumed psychoactive drugs globally. Hazardous drinking, defined by quantity and frequency of consumption, is associated with acute and chronic morbidity. Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are psychiatric syndromes characterized by impaired control over drinking and other symptoms. Contemporary aetiological perspectives on AUDs apply a biopsychosocial framework that emphasizes the interplay of genetics, neurobiology, psychology, and an individual's social and societal context. There is strong evidence that AUDs are genetically influenced, but with a complex polygenic architecture. Likewise, there is robust evidence for environmental influences, such as adverse childhood exposures and maladaptive developmental trajectories. Well-established biological and psychological determinants of AUDs include neuroadaptive changes following persistent use, differences in brain structure and function, and motivational determinants including overvaluation of alcohol reinforcement, acute effects of environmental triggers and stress, elevations in multiple facets of impulsivity, and lack of alternative reinforcers. Social factors include bidirectional roles of social networks and sociocultural influences, such as public health control strategies and social determinants of health. An array of evidence-based approaches for reducing alcohol harms are available, including screening, pharmacotherapies, psychological interventions and policy strategies, but are substantially underused. Priorities for the field include translating advances in basic biobehavioural research into novel clinical applications and, in turn, promoting widespread implementation of evidence-based clinical approaches in practice and health-care systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations194
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Reviews Disease PrimersSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207