Intensity of drug injection as a determinant of sustained injection cessation among chronic drug users: the interface with social factors and service utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with sustained injection cessation and to examine further the relationship between the occurrence of sustained injection cessation of injection drug users (IDUs) and prior injection frequency. DESIGN AND SETTING: IDUs in the Montreal St Luc Cohort who had at least three consecutive interviews between 1995 and 1999 were included. Sustained injection cessation was defined as a period of at least 7 consecutive months without injection. All IDUs completed interview-administered questionnaires on socio-demographic characteristics, drug and sexual behaviours and health-related issues. Logistic regression was used for analyses. FINDINGS: A total of 186/1004 (18.5%) IDUs reported a period of sustained injection cessation during the study period. In multivariate analysis, HIV-positive status, 'booting' and cumulative time spent in prison were negatively associated with injection cessation, while injection initiation after 35 years of age and frequent crack use were positively associated with injection cessation. We found a negative association between the occurrence of injection cessation and the frequency of injection; the odds ratios (OR) for cessation were 0.49 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03, 0.78] for IDUs who injected 30-100 times and 0.21 (95% CI: 0.10, 0.46) for IDUs who injected more than 100 times in the previous month. Attending needle exchange programmes (NEPs) or pharmacies appeared to be a modifier of the relation between cessation and prior injection frequency. The OR was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.42, 1.12) for IDUs who injected 30-100 times prior to injection and attended NEPs or pharmacies and was 0.07 (0.01, 0.30) for IDUs who did not use these services. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, a fifth of IDUs experienced at least one episode of injection cessation of 7 months or more during a period of 4.5 years. Our data suggest that NEPs and pharmacies may have played a role in inducing injection cessation episodes in a subgroup of IDUs. Research is needed to better identify the characteristics of IDUs who could benefit from an injection cessation intervention strategy. This information is important for social and health policy planning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".