MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7001756181

Le stanze del consumo. Un luogo sicuro e supervisionato per l’uso di sostanze illecite

2021· book-chapter· en· W7001756181 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarm reductionService (business)Context (archaeology)Psychological interventionHarmHealth care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) are one of the most innovative and disputed strategies for reducing drug-related harm. DCRs are venues that provide hygienic environments in which people are allowed to use illegal drugs under supervision of a healthcare professional, a trained allied service provider, or a peer. The first trial of this service took place more than thirty years ago and to date there are more than 90 DCRs operating in Oceania, Europe and North America. Although Italy has long-standing experience in harm reduction policies, sanctioned DCRs have been never implemented and, likewise, there are few publications on this topic. Our aim is therefore to present DCRs to the Italian readers, by highlight- ing its purposes, characteristics, evidence-based effectiveness and impacts at the urban level. Moreover, we discuss two case studies: Insite and other experiments that have taken place in Vancouver, a city that stood up as an example of excellence and innovation in this field and the ‘Stanzetta of Collegno’ (Turin), a long-lasting drug user-run DCR experience. Since the integration of harm reduction interventions in the Essential Assistance Levels in 2017, we aim to foster a debate on DCRs as a way to expand Italian harm reduction policies.

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)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.009

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBOA (University of Milano-Bicocca)Same topicStatistical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207