Health risk and health seeking behaviours among people who inject performance and image enhancing drugs who access needle syringe programs in Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: People who use performance and image enhancing drugs (PIED) are a growing population in needle syringe programs (NSP) in Australia. Previous international research has identified heterogeneity among the PIED-using population. This study investigated health behaviours among NSP attendees who had recently (last 12 months) injected PIEDs and examined differences among this group according to recent psychoactive drug use. DESIGN AND METHODS: The Australian Needle and Syringe Program Survey is an annually repeated cross-sectional survey conducted at approximately 50 NSPs nationally. In 2015, respondents provided information on their demographic characteristics, health risk and health monitoring behaviours, and provided a capillary dried blood spot for HIV and hepatitis C virus antibody testing. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions assessed factors associated with recent (last 12 months) use (all routes of administration) of psychoactive drugs. RESULTS: Among recent PIED injectors (n = 156), 59% had recently used psychoactive substances. Those who had recently used psychoactive drugs were significantly younger, less educated and more likely to have experienced redness at an injection site in the previous 12 months but were more likely to report recent HIV/hepatitis C virus testing. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: This study identified significant differences in demographic characteristics, risk and health seeking behaviour among PIED users who did and did not also use psychoactive substances. There is a need to enhance and tailor harm reduction efforts and to build the capacity of NSP staff to better meet the needs of this diverse group.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".