High-Intensity Drug Use and Health Service Access Among Street-Involved Youth in a Canadian Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Addiction severity has been associated with numerous social- and health-related harms. This study sought to examine the prevalence and correlates of high-intensity drug use among street-involved youth in a Canadian setting with a focus on high-risk drug use practices and health service access. METHODS: Data were derived from the At-Risk Youth Study, a Vancouver-based prospective cohort of street-involved youth aged 14-26. We used generalized estimating equations to examine variables associated with high-intensity drug use, defined as daily use of crack cocaine, cocaine, heroin, or crystal methamphetamine. RESULTS: From September 2005 to November 2012, of 1017 youth included in the analyses, 529 (52%) reported high-intensity drug use as defined above at least once during the study period. In a multivariate analysis, older age (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 1.47); residing in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver (AOR = 1.46); homelessness (AOR = 1.30); recent incarceration (AOR = 1.25); inability to access addiction treatment (AOR = 1.42); and crack pipe sharing and/or used syringe injecting (AOR = 2.64), were all positively and independently associated with high-intensity drug use (p < 0.05). The most common barrier to accessing addiction treatment reported by these youth was long waiting lists. CONCLUSIONS: High-intensity drug use among street-involved youth was prevalent and associated with structural and geographical disadvantages in addition to high-risk drug administration practices. Youth reporting more frequent drug use also reported barriers to accessing addiction treatment, highlighting the need to expand addiction services tailored to youth at greatest risk of harm from illicit drug use and street-involvement.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".