Drug injection among street youth: the first time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To describe the circumstances of the first drug injection among street youth. DESIGN: A cohort study conducted in 1995-2000. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects aged 14-25 years old were recruited in all major Montreal organizations offering free services to street youth. MEASUREMENT: Subjects who reported having ever injected drugs completed questions on the circumstances of their first injection (calendar time, location, type of relationship with the initiator, presence of others, drug first injected, source of needle and use of clean needle and other injection materials). Questions on characteristics of the initiator and prior use of the first injected drug were added during the course of the study. FINDINGS: Of 980 participants, 530 (54%) had ever injected drugs. Questionnaires were completed by 505 subjects, including 77 who also answered the additional questions. The mean age at first injection was 17.7 years. First injection occurred mainly in public places (41%). It was performed by a close friend (41%), the youth himself/herself (27%), an acquaintance (15%), a lover (10%) or another person (7%). Overall, 84% of youth first injected with a clean needle; only 62% used clean drug preparation equipment. The first drug injected was generally cocaine (47%) or heroin (41%). Two-thirds (53/77) had used the drug of first injection previously; however, the majority was not dependent upon it. CONCLUSIONS: Most street youth used clean needles at first injection, but use of other clean injection materials was less frequent. Factors other than dependence appear to play a significant role in initiation into injection.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".