Sentinel surveillance of injuries and poisonings associated with cocaine and other substance use: results from the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Consumption of cocaine can lead to numerous injuries and poisoning. However, only a limited number of studies have explored cocaine-related injuries. This study examined a wide range of injuries and poisonings related to cocaine only and in combination with other substances in Canada using sentinel surveillance data captured by the electronic Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (eCHIRPP). METHODS: Injuries and poisonings related to the use of cocaine only or in combination with other substances were identified in the eCHIRPP database between January 2012 and December 2019 for all ages. Descriptive analyses were performed to investigate the distribution of demographic and injury characteristics in poisoning and injury records related to the use of cocaine only and in combination with other substances. Statistical analyses were conducted to find the proportion of cocaine-related injuries per 100000 eCHIRPP records. Cocaine-related injury trends were assessed using annual percent change (APC) Results: Cocaine-related injuries and poisonings were observed in 123 records per 100 000 eCHIRPP records. Of the 1482 patients who presented to emergency departments of CHIRPP sites with this type of injury or poisoning, the majority involved cocaine use in combination with one or more substances (80.0%; n = 1186), whereas cocaine-only use was the minority (20.0%; n = 296). Among all cocaine-related records, poisoning was the leading diagnosis (62.7%; n = 930) and most injuries and poisonings were unintentional (73.5%; n = 1090). Overall, the trend of cocaine-related eCHIRPP records for all age groups increased over the study period from 2012 to 2019 (APC [total] = 47.8%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings of a higher proportion of cocaine-related injuries and poisonings among adolescents and young adults, as well as the co-consumption of cocaine with other substances, demonstrate the importance of extensive surveillance of cocainerelated injuries and poisonings and the implementation of evidence-based public health interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".