Understanding the experiences of gay men in addiction treatment: a phenomenological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gay men are a population which have specific needs in our health and social service system. This research explores how some gay men have experienced addiction treatment in the province of Ontario. Through a qualitative study based on phenomenological methods, 10 diverse gay men were asked to tell their story in terms of their addiction treatment experience. The participants had accessed treatment services within the last 5 years and these services included outpatient, day and residential treatment. Using a long-interview format, the researcher listened as the participants told their stories regarding why they accessed treatment services, how they accessed these services, and how over-all experience of treatment impacted them. These interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed with the assistance of the software program NUDIST. Several themes emerged that highlight a system that was insensitive to the needs of these gay men. A variety of situations occurred, some very blatant in terms of harassment, and others more subtle yet still harmful in their impact. A focus group was conducted with the participants and the themes that emerged from the transcripts were reviewed. During the focus group participants developed a set of 5 recommendations that they felt must be implemented if the needs of gay men are to be addressed fairly within mainstream treatment services. All the participants agreed to the recommendations that were developed and these will be presented to the Ontario Substance Abuse Bureau in the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".