The Psycho-Social and Socio-Cultural Factors of Crystal Methamphetamine Use Among the Gay, Bi and MSM (GBM) Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the United States, men who have sex with men (MSM) remain as the demographic group with the highest HIV incidence rates and account for 53% of new HIV infections in 2006 (Rajasingham, Mimiaga, White, Pinkston, Baden, & Mitty, 2012). One of the reasons accounting for such high rates of HIV transmission between gay, bisexual and MSM (GBM) can be attributed to poly-substance use and the use of crystal methamphetamine (Solomon, Halkitis, Moeller, & Pappas, 2012; Rajasingham et al., 2012). The U.S. Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (2007) reported methamphetamine use in the MSM community is of particular concern due to the high prevalence of HIV and the use of the stimulant. Meanwhile, researchers have found methamphetamine use is closely corrleated to sexual risk taking among GBM and such intimate link between risky sexual behaviour and methamphetamine use have led to a possible double epidemic (Halkitis, Green, & Carragher, 2006). In particular, the use of methamphetamine has been found to be correlated to the frequency of unprotected insertive anal intercourse (UIAI) and unprotected receptive anal intercourse (URAI) among HIV positive and persons with unknown serostatus causal partners over time (Halkitis, Mukherjee, & Palamar, 2009). As an effort to better understand this social pheonemon, this paper focuses on the exploration and identification of the psycho-social and socio-cultural factors of crystal methamphetamine use among the GBM population.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".