MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969014701 · doi:10.1111/dar.12969

Characterising the association between positive hepatitis C virus antibody and pain among people who inject drugs

2019· article· en· W2969014701 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michelle Ng, Kanna Hayashi, Pauline Voon, Hennady P. Shulha, Kora DeBeck, M‐J Milloy, Lianping Ti

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug and Alcohol Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseSimon Fraser UniversitySt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCPierre Elliott Trudeau FoundationNational Institute on Drug AbuseSt. Paul's Foundation
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfoundingConfidence intervalInternal medicineHepatitis C virusHepatitis CEpidemiologyProspective cohort studyImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: People who inject drugs (PWID) are a key group within the hepatitis C virus (HCV) pandemic. Chronic pain is a common condition among PWID as these individuals are often exposed to soft tissue infections due to injections and violence. This study aims to characterise the relationship between HCV exposure and pain among PWID. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were derived from three prospective cohorts of PWID in Vancouver, Canada, between December 2011 and November 2016. The primary outcome was pain severity, which was defined based on the Euroqol EQ-5D-3L pain subscale. A bivariable and multivariable ordinal generalised estimating equations model was used to quantify the association between HCV exposure and pain among participants. RESULTS: One thousand and twelve of 2038 participants (50%) reported moderate/extreme pain at baseline. In total, 1473 (72%) participants were HCV-antibody positive. In unadjusted analyses, HCV exposure was positively associated with increased pain [odds ratio (OR) = 1.47; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-1.81]. However, once adjusted for known confounders in multivariable analyses, HCV exposure did not remain significantly associated with increased pain (adjusted OR = 1.00; 95%CI: 0.78-1.28). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of PWID, HCV exposure was not significantly associated with pain once other factors were considered. These various factors may explain the elevated risk of pain among PWID and should be addressed in future initiatives when managing pain among PWID with HCV exposure. Future studies should also examine whether pain changes with changes in HCV status (i.e. active vs. cleared infection).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug and Alcohol ReviewSame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207