The Association Between Self-Reported Non-Injection Cocaine Use and Hepatitis C in the United States: An Analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies conducted on hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission have focused primarily on its transmission among people who inject drugs. However, there is evidence that transmission may also occur through the sharing of contaminated non-injection implements used to consume drugs nasally, orally, or by inhalation. Studies to date have not conclusively established a relationship between these routes of cocaine use and HCV. We quantified the association between cocaine use and HCV, specifically among individuals who have never injected an illicit substance. METHOD: Data from the 2011-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test for an association between cocaine use and HCV among 10,106 individuals (5,201 females). Covariates included age, race, sex, education, income, and immigrant status. RESULTS: In the unadjusted model, individuals who reported cocaine use had 4.79 (95% CI [2.70, 8.47]) times the odds of ever having HCV compared with those who did not use cocaine. In the adjusted model, individuals who reported cocaine use had 4.48 (95% CI [2.36, 8.50]) times the odds of ever having HCV compared with those who did not use cocaine. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that individuals who report non-injection cocaine use have an inflated risk of HCV compared with individuals who report no cocaine use. Harm reduction interventions to reduce the transmission of HCV should therefore be targeted to all people who use drugs, including those who use cocaine orally, intra-nasally, and by inhalation.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".