Recours aux services psychosociaux en ligne avant et pendant la pandémie de la COVID-19 par les personnes utilisatrices de substances psychoactives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude documente l’utilisation des services psychosociaux en ligne durant la pandémie de COVID-19 auprès de 1159 adultes qui consomment des substances psychoactives. Pendant cette période, 38 % ont utilisé ces services. En se basant sur le modèle d’Andersen, l’utilisation de ces services est associée 1) aux facteurs prédisposants du genre (s’identifier comme femme) et de l’âge (avoir 18 à 24 ans comparé à avoir 65 et plus), 2) au facteur facilitant du recours antérieur aux services psychosociaux en ligne et 3) aux facteurs de besoin, c’est-à-dire la détresse psychologique élevée, la consommation pour gérer son anxiété et l’augmentation de la fréquence de la consommation durant la pandémie. La complémentarité des modalités de services psychosociaux en présence et en ligne est nécessaire, car ces services répondent notamment aux besoins de s’informer et de développer des stratégies de gestion de soi.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".