Telehealth for people who inject drugs: An acceptable method of treatment but challenging to access
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While telemedicine is seen as an emerging practice that will outlast the COVID-19 pandemic, it can reduce health services for those with limited internet and technological devices access or sufficient literacy. OBJECTIVE(S): The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of using telehealth with people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: A survey on availability and accessibility of different methods of communication was administered to a sample of PWID from an ongoing longitudinal cohort in Montréal, Canada. RESULTS: Among the 96 respondents, phone calls were generally considered acceptable (89.6%) although availability was low (50%). Acceptability and availability of social media were 26% and 41.7%, respectively. Internet-based communication applications were considered acceptable to use for telehealth in 28.1% of participants, even if not frequently available (8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth is an acceptable form of treatment for PWID, but may be challenging due to low availability of phone or internet access.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".