MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791750264 · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdx187

Residential eviction predicts initiation of or relapse into crystal methamphetamine use among people who inject drugs: a prospective cohort study

2017· article· en· W2791750264 on OpenAlexafffundabout
William Damon, Ryan McNeil, M‐J Milloy, Ekaterina Nosova, Thomas Kerr, Kanna Hayashi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthMichael Smith Health Research BCNational Institute on Drug AbuseCanada Research ChairsVancouver Foundation
KeywordsEvictionProspective cohort studyMedicineMethamphetamineCohortEnvironmental healthCohort studyPsychiatryEmergency medicineMedical emergencyFamily medicineInternal medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reports of increasing methamphetamine use among vulnerable populations may be attributed in part to the adaptive use of stimulants in response to the loss of stable housing through residential eviction. We employed multivariable recurrent event extended Cox regression to examine the independent association between recent evictions and initiation of or relapse into crystal methamphetamine use among people who inject drugs in Vancouver, Canada enrolled in two prospective cohort studies. In a multivariable analysis, eviction remained independently associated with methamphetamine initiation or relapse (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.90; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-2.75). Findings demonstrate the need to secure tenancies for drug-using populations to reduce harms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations67
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public HealthSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207