Determinants of injection drug user (IDU) syringe sharing: the relationship between availability of syringes and risk network member characteristics in Winnipeg, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Despite the establishment of syringe exchange programmes, syringe-sharing behaviour remains common among some injection drug users (IDU). Previous studies have identified several individual- and social network-level variables associated with syringe sharing. We examine the extent to which each of these variables is related independently to this behaviour within a diverse study population. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional survey of 435 IDU conducted between December 2003 and September 2004 in Winnipeg, Canada. MEASUREMENTS: Individual and social-network variables were obtained from a survey instrument administered through a personal interview. Syringe sharing was defined as receptive syringe sharing in the last 6 months. Logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations was used to determine simultaneously the role of individual-level and risk network member-level variables on the odds of syringe sharing. FINDINGS: Individuals' relationship to a risk network member (sex partner, OR: 15.3 95% CI: 7.6-30.8; family member, OR: 3.4 95% CI: 1.3-9.0) and difficulty of access to syringes (OR: 3.6 95% CI: 1.3-9.9) were predictive of syringe sharing. Dyads who 'often' pooled resources to obtain drugs were at 4.9 times (95% CI: 2.1-11.6) the odds of syringe sharing, while those who 'sometimes' pooled resources were at 2.8 times (95% CI: 1.1-6.7) the odds, compared to those who 'never' pooled resources together. CONCLUSIONS: Syringe sharing in this population depended on both the availability of clean syringes and social network relationships. Adopting interventions that take into account relationships and behaviours that shape social norms present in networks/dyads would be a necessary prevention strategy alongside the provision of clean syringes.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".