Elevated Syringe Borrowing Among Men Who Have Sex With Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite efforts to scale up HIV prevention services for drug users, high rates of HIV risk behavior persist among some subpopulations. Given that few prospective studies have considered the relationship between sexual activity and syringe sharing, we sought to evaluate syringe sharing among male injection drug users (IDUs) who have sex with men (MSM) in Vancouver. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of factors associated with syringe borrowing among male participants enrolled in the Vancouver Injection Drug Users Study during the years 1996 to 2005 using generalized estimating equations (GEE). RESULTS: Among the 1019 male participants included in this analysis, 553 (54.3%) reported borrowing syringes during the study period. In multivariate GEE analysis, MSM were at an elevated risk for syringe borrowing (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10 to 2.04) after extensive adjustment for other known risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Among male participants, having sex with men was found to be strongly and independently associated with syringe borrowing. Our findings may aid policy makers in their efforts to identify IDUs who should be targeted with education and prevention efforts, and indicate the need for ongoing development of prevention interventions that address sexual orientation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".