Health outcomes associated with methamphetamine use among young people: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Methamphetamine (MA) use among young people is of significant social, economic and public health concern to affected communities and policy makers. While responses have focused upon various perceived severe harms of MA use, effective public health interventions require a strong scientific evidence base. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify scientific studies investigating health outcomes associated with MA use among young people aged 10-24 years. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) was used to categorize outcomes and determine the level of evidence for each series of harms. RESULTS: We identified 47 eligible studies for review. Consistent associations were observed between MA use and several mental health outcomes, including depression, suicidal ideation and psychosis. Suicide and overdose appear to be significant sources of morbidity and mortality among young MA users. Evidence for a strong association between MA use and increased risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other sexually transmitted infections is equivocal. Finally, we identified only weak evidence of an association between MA use and dental diseases among young people. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence indicates a consistent relationship between MA use and mental health outcomes (e.g. depression, psychosis) and an increased risk of mortality due to suicide and overdose. We found insufficient evidence of an association between MA use and other previously cited harms, including infectious diseases and dental outcomes. As such, future research of higher methodological quality is required to further investigate possible associations. Current interventions should focus attention upon MA-related health outcomes for which sound scientific evidence is available.
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 | 0.006 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".