Links Between Childhood Abuse, Insidious Trauma, and Methamphetamine Use Across the Lifespan Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Qualitative Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developmental and lifespan examinations of methamphetamine use among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) remain limited. We used a feminist trauma framework to examine potential links between childhood trauma, trauma-related stressors, and methamphetamine use among GBM. From June 2018 to October 2018, semi-structured interviews (N = 33) were conducted with GBM across British Columbia. Interviews focused on sexual experiences, support services, and methamphetamine use. Using thematic analysis, two overarching trauma-related themes were identified: developmental and insidious trauma and coping with trauma-related stressors. GBM’s methamphetamine use co-occurred with childhood experiences of family- and peer-perpetrated heterosexism, childhood sexual abuse, and intersecting forms of oppression/marginalization. These experiences manifested as internalized shame, interpersonal anxiety, and low self-esteem. In adulthood, participants reported difficulty managing emotions, low self-confidence, and loneliness. GBM reported using methamphetamine to manage negative emotions, life stressors, and overcome barriers to interpersonal connection. Findings indicate a need for trauma-informed interventions that address underlying issues and help GBM cultivate supportive relationships.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".