MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309617873 · doi:10.1186/s12954-022-00701-w

Injecting drugs alone during an overdose crisis in Vancouver, Canada

2022· article· en· W4309617873 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexa Norton, Kanna Hayashi, Cheyenne Johnson, JinCheol Choi, M‐J Milloy, Thomas Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueHarm Reduction Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCNational Institute on Drug AbuseUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Foundation
KeywordsMedicineDemographyOdds ratioConfidence intervalBinge drinkingResidencePsychiatryPoison controlSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Settings throughout Canada and the USA continue to experience crises of overdose death due to the toxic unregulated drug supply. Injecting drugs alone limits the potential for intervention and has accounted for a significant proportion of overdose deaths, yet the practice remains understudied. We sought to examine the practice of injecting alone among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Vancouver, Canada. METHODS: Data were derived from two prospective cohorts of people who use drugs between June 2016 and November 2018. This analysis was restricted to participants who, in the previous 6 months, reported any injection drug use. Rates of injecting alone were categorized as always, usually, sometimes, or occasionally. We fit a multivariable generalized linear mixed model to identify factors associated with injecting drugs alone. RESULTS: Among 1070 PWID who contributed 3307 observations, 931 (87%) reported injecting alone at least once during the study period. In total, there were 729 (22%) reports of always injecting alone, 722 (21.8%) usually, 471 (14.2%) sometimes, 513 (15.5%) occasionally, and 872 (26.4%) never. In a multivariable model, factors positively associated with injecting drugs alone included male sex (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-2.37), residence in the Downtown Eastside neighbourhood (AOR 1.43; 95% CI 1.08-1.91), binge drug use (AOR 1.36; 95% CI 1.08-1.72), and experiencing physical or sexual violence or both (AOR 1.43; 95% CI 1.00-2.03). Protective factors included Indigenous ancestry (AOR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52-0.98) and being in a relationship (AOR 0.30; 95% CI 0.23-0.39). CONCLUSION: We observed that injecting alone, a key risk for overdose mortality, was common among PWID in Vancouver. Our findings underline the need for additional overdose prevention measures that are gender-specific, culturally appropriate, violence- and trauma-informed, and available to those who inject alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHarm Reduction JournalSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207