Experience of Family Members of Relatives With Substance Use Disorders: An Integrative Literature Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Substance use disorders (SUDs) present substantial challenges for family members living with or supporting relatives with SUDs. This review explores existing literature on family members’ experiences with relatives with SUDs and their support needs. Method: An integrative review was conducted by searching literature in the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, PubMed, PsycINFO, ProQuest, and Scopus databases. Results: Five themes were generated based on analysis of 26 empirical studies: (a) family members’ and caregivers’ experiences of SUDs; (b) impact of SUDs-related aggressive/violent behaviors on families; (c) dilemmas faced by family members; (d) culture and family stigma related to SUDs; and (e) factors contributing to SUDs, challenges, and support needs. The review highlighted barriers to seeking support due to stigma and guilt, underscoring the need for structured support programs. Conclusions: This review sheds light on the challenges faced by family members with relatives suffering from SUDs and emphasizes the crucial need for structured support programs. The findings provide insights for developing initiatives to address the social and trauma-induced needs of family members and to establish support resources for them.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it