MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093574596 · doi:10.1016/s1055-3290(06)60422-6

The Utility of the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change for HIV Risk Reduction in Injection Drug Users

2000· review· en· W2093574596 on OpenAlexaff
San Patten, Ardene Robinson Vollman, Wilfreda E. Thurston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranstheoretical modelBehavior changeBehaviour changePopulationHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)MedicineTreatment as preventionPsychologyTransmission (telecommunications)Harm reductionNeedle sharingEnvironmental healthClinical psychologyPsychiatryCondomSocial psychologyAntiretroviral therapyPsychological interventionViral loadImmunologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spread of HIV among injection drug users (IDUs) is the second most common mode of transmission next to sexual contact. Although HIV infections can be prevented by changing high-risk behaviors such as needle sharing, these high-risk behaviors are highly complex. Initially developed for smoking cessation, Prochaska's Transtheoretical Model (TTM) is well-suited to the IDU population because it recognizes that chronic behavior patterns are usually under some combination of biological, social, and self-control. The objective of this article is to examine the utility of the TTM for promoting risk reduction behaviors among IDUs. This article will outline (a) the challenges of applying the TTM to IDU behaviors with respect to HIV prevention, (b) the four major components of the TTM as they relate to IDUs, (c) how risk reduction practitioners are currently using the TTM, and (d) current and future research using the TTM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS CareSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207