Risk behaviours associated with hepatitis C infection among persons who inject drugs in Prince George, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persons who inject drugs (PWIDs) are at high-risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection due to blood-to-blood contact when sharing injection equipment (World Health Organization, 2014).To investigate this health concern, the current thesis research obtained the 2008 and 2012 Prince George I-Track survey datasets from the Public Health Agency of Canada (2012).Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine risk behaviours and characteristics associated with HCV infection among PWIDs living in Prince George, British Columbia (BC).Two independent variables were significantly associated with HCV infection among Prince George PWIDs: injecting for more than two years, Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 7.87, p < .001,95% CI [3.60, 17.18], and injecting alone (versus with others), AOR 2.49, p = .004,95% CI [1.35, 4.59].The study results provide health practitioners with a highly sensitive (94.1%) predictive tool to identify PWIDs in Prince George, BC who are most likely to be infected with HCV.ii
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".