Navigating treatment in the shadow of the overdose crisis: Perspectives of youth experiencing street-involvement across British Columbia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Youth experiencing street-involvement are particularly vulnerable to substance use-related harms. Since an overdose public health emergency was declared in British Columbia (BC) in 2016, there have been concerted efforts to expand youths' access to integrated mental health and substance use treatment across the province. The present study sought to explore how youth were navigating this rapidly evolving treatment landscape. Methods: Focus groups were conducted with youth experiencing street-involvement in three BC cities, followed by a summit event in Vancouver. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and coded thematically alongside observational field notes. All activities were undertaken in collaboration with a Youth Advisory Council. Results: Across BC, youth expressed desires to achieve aspects of what some called a "normal life" following treatment, which required having "somewhere to go next." In the absence of desirable housing and adequate income, youth were often left with the crushing sense that, despite their efforts, treatment would not ultimately help them to "get somewhere better." Negative experiences in treatment settings were also shaped by the files that "followed" youth across care settings, inappropriate information sharing between providers, and an overemphasis on pharmacotherapies (namely, opioid agonist therapies and psychotropic medications). Conclusion: Our findings point to the inability of existing services and systems to address entrenched marginalization and chronic instability, and underscore the importance of relationship-, trust-, and future-building to providing treatment and care to youth. Young people must be empowered with control over their treatment trajectories, including decision-making surrounding pharmacotherapies and information sharing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".