MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175899874 · doi:10.1186/s12954-015-0088-4

Why the FUSS (Fentanyl Urine Screen Study)? A cross-sectional survey to characterize an emerging threat to people who use drugs in British Columbia, Canada

2015· article· en· W2175899874 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHarm Reduction Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Centre for Disease Control
FundersBritish Columbia Centre for Disease Control
KeywordsFentanylMedicineHeroinHarm reductionPublic healthOdds ratioPopulationEmergency medicineFamily medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental healthInternal medicineAnesthesiaDrugNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fentanyl-detected illicit drug overdose deaths in British Columbia (BC) recently increased dramatically from 13 deaths in 2012 to 90 deaths in 2014, signaling an emerging public health concern. Illicit fentanyl is sold as pills or powders, often mixed with other substances like heroin or oxycodone; reports from coroners suggested that fentanyl was frequently taken unknowingly by people who use drugs. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and characteristics of fentanyl use among clients accessing harm reduction (HR) services in BC. METHODS: Participants attending HR services at 17 sites across BC were invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire describing drugs they have used within the last 3 days and provide a urine sample to test for fentanyl. Data from eligible participants were analyzed using descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate statistical methods. RESULTS: Surveys from 17 HR sites were received, resulting in analysis of responses from 242 eligible participants. Most participants used multiple substances (median = 3), with crystal meth (59%) and heroin (52%) use most frequently reported. Seventy participants (29%) tested positive for fentanyl, 73% of whom did not report using fentanyl. Controlling for age, gender, and health authority, reported use of fentanyl (odds ratio (OR) = 6.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [2.52, 15.78], p < 0.001) and crystal methamphetamine (OR = 3.82, 95% CI = [1.79, 8.63], p < 0.001) use were significantly associated with fentanyl detection. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of those testing positive who did not report knowingly using fentanyl represents a considerable public health concern. The risk of overdose among this vulnerable population highlights the need for targeted HR strategies, such as increased accessibility to naloxone, overdose education, and urine screens.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.262 · 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