MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889438592 · doi:10.14745/ccdr.v40i18a05

Key findings from a national enhanced HIV surveillance system: 2010 - 2012

2014· article· en· W2889438592 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jill Tarasuk, Susanna Ogunnaike-Cooke, Chris Archibald, Rachel L. MacLean, Ramona Bennett, Ji-Eun Kim, L Malloch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada Communicable Disease Report · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineHepatitis CNeedle sharingHeroinFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Public healthHepatitisEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePsychiatryDrugCondom

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs represent an important risk group in Canada's HIV epidemic. I-Track is a national public health surveillance system designed to monitor HIV and hepatitis C prevalence and associated risk behaviour factors among people who inject drugs in Canada. Information is collected through cross-sectional surveys conducted periodically at sentinel sites across Canada. I-Track Phase 3 was conducted between April 26, 2010 and August 7, 2012 across 11 participating sentinel sites. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of HIV, lifetime exposure to hepatitis C and associated risk behaviours among people who inject drugs in Canada to guide and help evaluate HIV and hepatitis C prevention, treatment and control activities. METHODS: People who had injected drugs in the six months prior to the interview and who met the minimum age of consent participated in an interviewer administered survey and provided a blood sample for HIV and hepatitis C antibody testing. Descriptive analyses were performed with sex-based comparisons. RESULTS: There were 2,687 people who participated in the survey. 68.2% were male, 60.9% were between the ages of 30 and 49 years and 36.2% self-identified as Aboriginal. Among the participants who provided a blood sample of sufficient quantity for testing, 11.2% were HIV seropositive and their lifetime exposure to hepatitis C infection was 68.0%. Drugs commonly injected included cocaine (64.3%), hydromorphone (47.2%), non-prescribed morphine (47.0%), oxycodone (37.7%) and heroin (26.7%). Injecting with previously used needles and/or other injection equipment was reported by 15.5% and 34.5% of participants, respectively. Just over one-third reported having two or more sex partners in the six months prior to the interview (34.4%) and using a condom at last sex (36.6%). The majority of participants had tested at least once in their lifetime for HIV or hepatitis C (92.9% and 91.4%, respectively). A large proportion of the participants who reported being HIV positive were under the care of a doctor (95.0%) and nearly two-thirds were taking medications prescribed for their HIV infection at the time of the interview (66.0%). CONCLUSION: HIV seroprevalence and lifetime exposure to hepatitis C infection were high among I-Track Phase 3 participants. Although many participants reported safe injection and safe sexual practices, a high proportion of participants reported risk behaviours associated with acquisition and transmission of HIV and hepatitis C. People who inject drugs continue to represent an important risk group in Canada's HIV epidemic and the I-Track Phase 3 survey findings highlight the need for continued treatment and prevention services, as well as routine and integrated testing among people who inject drugs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanada Communicable Disease ReportSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207