“The Drug Use Unfortunately isn’t all Bad”: Chronic Disease Self-Management Complexity and Strategy Among Marginalized People Who Use Drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-management programs improve health outcomes and self-management is recommended for chronic conditions. Yet chronic disease self-management supports have rarely been applied to people who use drugs (PWUD). Thus, our objective was to explore self-management experiences among marginalized PWUD. We used community-based participatory methods and conducted qualitative interviews. Participants self-identified as having long-term and past year experience using non-prescribed drugs, one other chronic condition, and socioeconomic marginalization. We analyzed the data using reflexive thematic analysis. Although many participants considered drug use a chronic health issue, self-medicating with non-prescribed drugs was also a key self-management strategy to address other health issues. Participants also described numerous other strategies, including cognitive and behavioral tactics. These findings highlight the need for a safe supply of pharmaceutical-grade drugs to support self-management among marginalized PWUD. Self-management supports should also be tailored to address relevant topics (e.g., harm reduction, withdrawal), include creative activities, and not hinder PWUD's agency.
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 | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".