The Experience of Women With Opioid Use Disorder Accessing Methadone Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The number of women experiencing opioid use disorder (OUD) in Canada has increased exponentially. In Canada, healthcare is socialized and free for all citizens and, often, medications like methadone are free as well, yet few individuals with OUD access treatment services. The purpose of this study was to describe the lived experiences of Canadian women with OUD who were receiving methadone treatment. Interpretive phenomenology was used to investigate the treatment experiences of seven women with OUD. The conceptual framework of self-care of chronic illness was used to examine this phenomenon. Data were analyzed using a seven-step process of interpretive phenomenological analysis. Four major themes emerged: learning how to be you again, reaching out for help, finding your way to methadone, and going down the path of methadone. Women's experiences were influenced by family, friends, and healthcare providers. Accessibility and self-determination were important factors in entering and sustaining treatment. This study contributes to the discipline of nursing by providing accurate information regarding women's experiences with OUD and uncovering practice changes that can attract and retain women in treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".