MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365802283 · doi:10.2196/45717

Stimulant Use Associated With Psychosocial Factors, HIV Risk, and Concurrent Hazardous Alcohol Use Among US Adults: Exploratory Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study

2023· article· en· W4365802283 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frank Lee, Jennifer Jain, Lunthita Duthely, Janet Ikeda, Glenn‐Milo Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsStimulantPsychosocialMedicinePsychological interventionLogistic regressionEthnic groupDemographyEnvironmental healthGerontologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stimulant use is a major public health problem that contributes to morbidity and mortality among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States. To reduce the harms associated with stimulant use, there is a need to identify the factors associated with stimulant use to inform interventions. Additionally, there is a need to use large crowdsourcing platforms like Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) to engage more individuals who use substances across the United States. OBJECTIVE: We identified the correlates of stimulant use among people who use alcohol or stimulants in the United States recruited using MTurk. METHODS: Participants who were aged ≥18 years in the United States and reported alcohol or stimulant (ie, cocaine, crack cocaine, and methamphetamine) use were deemed eligible and recruited via the web platform MTurk. Participants completed a baseline survey, which assessed sociodemographics, psychosocial (ie, depression, affect, self-esteem, and stress) factors, substance use, and sexual behaviors. Data were collected and analyzed with STATA (version 17; StataCorp). Stratifying by MSM status, bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were built in STATA to examine the correlates of stimulant use. Multivariable models controlled for age, race, health insurance, and relationship status. RESULTS: Of 272 participants, 201 (73.9%) identified as male, 134 (49.2%) were MSM, 52 (19.1%) were from racial and ethnic minoritized communities, and 158 (58%) were in a relationship. The mean age was 36.10 (SD 10.3) years. A total of 40 (14.7%) participants reported stimulant use in the past 6 months. Factors significantly associated with stimulant use were being MSM (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.61, 95% CI 1.97-10.81), a higher Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Concise score (aOR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08-1.42), more intense cravings for alcohol in the past 24 hours (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), a higher depression score (aOR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.12), a greater number of male partners in the last 6 months (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 1.08-1.61), a greater number of female partners in the last 6 months (aOR 1.42, 95% CI 1.04-1.92), and being diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection (eg, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes simplex virus, human papillomavirus, and other) in the last 6 months (aOR 14.61, 95% CI 3.45-61.87). Additionally, there was a significant additive interaction between MSM status and negative affect, such that the impact of negative affect on stimulant use was significantly greater among MSM compared with non-MSM (relative excess risk due to interaction 0.085, 95% CI 0.037-0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that address stimulant use should use evidence-based approaches that reduce negative affect, depression, and cravings for alcohol. Additionally, interventions should be customized for MSM populations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207