Everyday Life Information Behavior, Health Information Seeking, and HIV and STI Awareness Among People Who Inject Drugs (PWID)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to explore the everyday life and health information behavior of people who inject drugs (PWID) in Bangladesh, as well as the effectiveness of HIV and STI informational programs in promoting safe injecting and sexual behavior. The study received 97 completed survey responses and conducted two focus group discussions (FGDs) with 13 PWID. Using de Certeau's everyday life practices framework, the study aims to understand the tactical information behavior of PWID in the context of a developing country where access to government services and trust in authorities may be significantly limited among marginalized populations such as PWID. The PWID in this study reported that they require very limited information in their everyday lives and consult mainly other PWID and NGO workers to meet their information needs. The findings also suggest that PWID is experiencing significant unmet information needs. For their health information/services, they reported mainly using local pharmacies and NGO clinics. Although PWID claimed to participate in HIV and STI prevention programs and events, their needle/syringe use and sexual practices suggest those informational programs were not always playing an important role in motivating them to practice safe injecting and sexual behavior. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of the vulnerability of PWID in accessing information and the limitations of informational programs in specific contexts, with implications for information science researchers and interdisciplinary agencies working to address the rapid spread of HIV and other infections among PWID in Bangladesh. Further research is needed to explore the motivational factors for practicing unsafe needle/syringe sharing and sexual practices among PWID.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".