MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108781538 · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fds105

Low rates of hepatitis C testing among people who inject drugs in Thailand: implications for peer-based interventions

2013· article· en· W2108781538 on OpenAlexafffund
Lianping Ti, K. Kaplan, Kanna Hayashi, Paisan Suwannawong, Evan Wood, Thomas Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersChulalongkorn UniversityCanada Research ChairsMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionOdds ratioHepatitis CConfidence intervalPopulationLogistic regressionHepatitis C virusMultivariate analysisEpidemiologyDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthImmunologyPsychiatryVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Regular testing for hepatitis C virus (HCV) provides an opportunity for HCV prevention and treatment efforts. In Thailand, the barriers and facilitators of HCV testing among people who inject drugs (IDU) are not known. METHODS: Using data derived from the Mitsampan Community Research Project between July and October 2011, we assessed the prevalence and factors associated with ever having been tested for HCV antibodies using bivariate statistics and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 427 participants, 141 (33.0%) reported a history of HCV antibody testing. In multivariate analyses, factors positively associated with receiving an HCV antibody test included higher than secondary education [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.20; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.35-3.64], binge drug use (AOR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.12-2.93), methadone treatment enrollment (AOR = 3.47; 95% CI: 1.85-6.95) and having received peer-based education on HCV (AOR = 4.22; 95% CI: 2.66-6.77). CONCLUSIONS: We found one-third of Thai IDU in our sample reporting a history of HCV testing. The finding that IDU who received peer-based HCV education were more likely to access HCV testing provides evidence for the value of peer-based interventions for this population.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public HealthSame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207