How substance use preferences and practices relate to fentanyl exposure among people who use drugs in Rhode Island, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Over 107,000 people died in the United States (U.S.) from drug overdose in 2022, with over one million overdose deaths since 1999. The U.S. drug market is characterized by a highly toxic, unregulated, and rapidly changing supply. Understanding the extent of exposure to fentanyl among people who use drugs (PWUD) will guide public health interventions aimed to decrease overdose. Methods: We utilized baseline data from the Rhode Island Prescription and Illicit Drug Study, a randomized controlled trial of harm reduction-oriented interventions for PWUD in Rhode Island from 2020 to 2023. We evaluated sociodemographic and drug use-related covariates and examined fentanyl presence in urine drug testing (UDT). We built a classification and regression tree (CART) model to identify subpopulations with the highest likelihood of fentanyl presence in UDT. Results: <0.05 for all). The CART analysis demonstrated a large variation in sample sub-groups' likelihood of fentanyl presence in UDT, from an estimated probability of 0.09 to 0.90. Expected recent fentanyl exposure was the most important predictor of fentanyl in UDT. Conclusions: Univariate analyses and CART modeling showed substantial variation in the presence of fentanyl in UDT among PWUD. Harm reduction services for people actively injecting drugs and drug checking programs based on capacity-building, empowerment, and targeted towards those not yet engaged in services are urgently needed to support PWUD in navigating the current volatile drug supply.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".