MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175311618 · doi:10.1177/20552076211028404

Developing a digital health strategy for people who use drugs: Lessons from COVID-19

2021· article· en· W3175311618 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Perri, Adrian Guţă, Marilou Gagnon, Matthew Bonn, Pamela Leece, Ahmed M. Bayoumi, Nanky Rai, Natasha Touesnard, Carol Strıke

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorCanadian Centre for Policy AlternativesPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarm reductionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)HarmMental healthDigital healthHealth careClosure (psychology)MedicineTelecarePublic relationsTelemedicineNursingPolitical sciencePsychiatryPublic healthDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 has significantly exacerbated negative health and social outcomes for people who use drugs (PWUD) around the world. The closure of harm reduction services, ongoing barriers to employment and housing, and pre-existing physical and mental health conditions have increased harms for diverse communities of PWUD. Adapting current models of health and human service delivery to better meet the needs of PWUD is essential in minimizing not only COVID-19 but also drug-related morbidity and mortality. This article draws on research, practice, and advocacy experiences, and discusses the potential for digital health tools such as remote monitoring and telecare to improve the continuum of care for PWUD. We call for a digital health strategy for PWUD and provide recommendations for future program development and implementation.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital HealthSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207