A Web-Based Toolkit to Provide Evidence-Based Resources About Crystal Methamphetamine for the Australian Community: Collaborative Development of Cracks in the Ice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of crystal methamphetamine (ice) and the associated harms for individuals, families, and communities across Australia has been the subject of growing concern in recent years. The provision of easily accessible, evidence-based, and up-to-date information and resources about crystal methamphetamine for the community is a critical component of an effective public health response. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe the codevelopment process of the Web-based Cracks in the Ice Community Toolkit, which was developed to improve access to evidence-based information and resources about crystal methamphetamine for the Australian community. METHODS: Development of the Cracks in the Ice Community Toolkit was conducted in collaboration with community members across Australia and with experts working in the addiction field. The iterative process involved the following: (1) consultation with end users, including community members, crystal methamphetamine users, families and friends of someone using crystal methamphetamine, health professionals, and teachers (n=451) via a cross-sectional Web-based survey to understand information needs; (2) content and Web development; and (3) user testing of a beta version of the Web-based toolkit among end users (n=41) and experts (n=10) to evaluate the toolkit's acceptability, relevance, and appeal. RESULTS: Initial end user consultation indicated that the most commonly endorsed reasons for visiting a website about crystal methamphetamine were "to get information for myself" (185/451, 41.0%) and "to find out how to help a friend or a family member" (136/451, 30.2%). Community consultation also revealed the need for simple information about crystal methamphetamine, including what it is, its effects, and when and where to seek help or support. Feedback on a beta version of the toolkit was positive in terms of content, readability, layout, look, and feel. Commonly identified areas for improvement related to increasing the level of engagement and personal connection, improving the ease of navigation, and balancing a "low prevalence of use, yet high impact" message. A total of 9138 users visited the website in the 3 months immediately post launch, and over 25,000 hard-copy Cracks in the Ice booklets and flyers were distributed across Australia. Of these resources, 60.93% (15,525/25,480) were distributed to relevant organizations and mailing list subscribers, and 39.07% (9955/25,480) were ordered directly by individuals, services, and community groups via the Cracks in the Ice website. CONCLUSIONS: The codevelopment process resulted in an engaging Web-based resource for the Australian community to access up-to-date and evidence-based resources about crystal methamphetamine. The Cracks in the Ice Community Toolkit provides much-needed information and support for individuals, families, and communities.
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 | 0.039 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".