The Overdose Crisis and Using Alone: Perspectives of People Who Use Drugs in Rural and Semi-Urban Areas of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A significant rise in the rate of overdose deaths in British Columbia (BC), driven by fentanyl contamination of the illicit drug supply, led to the declaration of a public health emergency in 2016. Those at greatest risk of death are people who use alone. This community-based participatory action research study based in the Fraser East region of BC study aimed to overview underlying factors that contribute to unwitnessed overdoses in semi-urban and rural settings. Methods: This descriptive study used a community-based participatory action research model with peer research associates (PRAs) involved at various research stages. In total, 22 interviews were conducted with participants aged 19 and over who used illicit drugs in the Fraser East since the start of the public health emergency in 2016. A collaborative data analysis approach was taken for data interpretation, and content analysis was performed to explore themes surrounding using alone. Results: Among people who use drugs (PWUD), using alone was found to be influenced by (a) the availability of drugs and personal funds, (b) personal safety, (c) stigma and shame, (d) protecting privacy, (e) mental health conditions and addiction, and (f) the lack of engagement with harm reduction services. At times, using alone was due to unforeseen, episode-specific situations. Conclusion: A multi-dimentional and context-specific approach is needed in overdose prevention and response for people who use drugs alone. There is need for enhanced approaches that address or include support services for families to reduce stigma and isolation of those at risk of an overdose.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".