MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080449140 · doi:10.1111/dar.13145

Self‐perception of assisting with future injection drug initiation: The influence of relationships in the process of drug injecting initiation

2020· article· en· W3080449140 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brittnie E. Bloom, Sonia Jain, Xiaoying Sun, Richard S. Garfein, Steffanie A. Strathdee, M‐J Milloy, Kanna Hayashi, Kora DeBeck, Ricky N. Bluthenthal, Dan Werb, Claudia Rafful

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug and Alcohol Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalSimon Fraser UniversityBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCSt. Michael's Hospital FoundationNational Institute on Drug AbuseOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceSt. Paul's FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionOddsLogistic regressionOdds ratioPerceptionInjection drug useDemographyGerontologyEnvironmental healthDrugPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicineDrug injection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: People who inject drugs (PWID) play critical roles in assisting others into injection drug use (IDU) initiation. Understanding perceptions of PWID's risk of initiating others is needed to inform interventions for prevention. The objective was to examine factors associated with self-perception of assisting with future IDU initiation events. The primary variables of interest are the relationships of PWID with the person(s) they assisted and their reasons for previously providing initiation assistance. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from Preventing Injecting by Modifying Existing Responses, a multi-site prospective community-recruited cohort study, were analysed. Analyses were restricted to PWID who reported ever providing IDU initiation assistance. Site-specific (Vancouver, Canada [n = 746]; San Diego, USA [n = 95] and Tijuana, Mexico [n = 92]) multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with self-perception of assisting with future IDU initiation. RESULTS: Having provided IDU initiation assistance to a family member or intimate partner decreased the odds of self-perception of assisting with future IDU initiation in Vancouver (AOR = 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8); however, previous IDU initiation assistance to an 'other' increased the odds of self-perception of assisting with future IDU in Tijuana (AOR = 12.0; 95% CI 2.1-70.3). Daily IDU (Vancouver: AOR = 3.7; 95% CI 2.1-6.4) and less than daily IDU (San Diego: AOR = 5.9; 95% CI 1.3-27.1) (Vancouver: AOR = 2.6; 95% CI 1.4-2.9) were associated with increased self-perception of assisting with future IDU compared to current non-injectors. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Relationship to past initiates and IDU frequency might increase PWID's self-perception of assisting with future IDU. Interventions focused on social support and reducing IDU frequency may decrease occurrences of IDU initiation assistance.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug and Alcohol ReviewSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207