Polydrug Use and HIV Risk Among People Who Inject Heroin in Tijuana, Mexico: A Latent Class Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although most people who inject drugs (PWID) in Tijuana, Mexico, primarily inject heroin, injection and non-injection use of methamphetamine and cocaine is common. We examined patterns of polydrug use among heroin injectors to inform prevention and treatment of drug use and its health and social consequences. METHODS: Participants were PWID residing in Tijuana, aged ≥18 years who reported heroin injection in the past six months and were recruited through respondent-driven sampling (n = 1,025). Latent class analysis was conducted to assign individuals to classes on a probabilistic basis, using four indicators of past six-month polydrug and polyroute use: cocaine injecting, cocaine smoking or snorting, methamphetamine injecting, and methamphetamine smoking or snorting. Latent class membership was regressed onto covariates in a multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Latent class analyses testing 1, 2, 3, and 4 classes were fit, with the 3-class solution fitting best. Class 1 was defined by predominantly heroin use (50.2%, n = 515); class 2 by methamphetamine and heroin use (43.7%, n = 448), and class 3 by methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroin use (6.0%, n = 62). Bivariate and multivariate analyses indicated a group of methamphetamine and cocaine users that exhibited higher-risk sexual practices and lower heroin injecting frequency, and a group of methamphetamine users who were younger and more likely to be female. CONCLUSIONS: Discrete subtypes of heroin PWID were identified based on methamphetamine and cocaine use patterns. These findings have identified subtypes of heroin injectors who require more tailored interventions to reduce the health and social harms of injecting drug use.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".