The Cedar Project: Understanding Barriers to Consistent Condom use over Time in a Cohort of Young Indigenous People who use Drugs
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
ABSTRACT Little information exists on the use of condoms as protective barriers to sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among indigenous people in Canada. This study explores risk factors of inconsistent condom use (during consensual sex) over time among participants in the Cedar Project, a prospective cohort study of indigenous young people living in Vancouver and Prince George, British Columbia, who use drugs. Due to the serial measurements for each study subject, generalized estimating equations modeling with logit link was used to accommodate the temporal correlation within subjects. For young women, inconsistent condom use over time was predicted by having a recent STI (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.12, 2.79]), smoking crack daily (AOR = 1.63, 95%CI [1.02, 2.61]), and having experienced recent sexual abuse (AOR = 2.07, 95%CI [1.20, 3.56]). Among young men, living in Prince George (AOR = 1.63, 95%CI [1.14, 2.39]) and daily crack smoking (AOR = 1.56, 95%CI [1.02, 2.40]) were associated with inconsistent condom use over time. Among participants who used injection drugs, inconsistent condom use was associated with smoking crack daily (AOR = 1.59, 95%CI [1.04, 2.43]) and sharing needles (AOR = 1.78, 95%CI [1.26, 2.51]). The availability and effectiveness of sexual health services must be prioritized for indigenous people, and the design of culturally safe sexual health programs requires the meaningful involvement of young indigenous people.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it