“The people who depended on us became expendable”: Experiences of frontline workers with lived and living expertise of drug use during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This paper explores the perspectives of a group of people with lived and living expertise of unregulated drug use who worked as frontline harm reduction service providers and activists in Canada during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the toxic drug crisis. Specifically, this paper explores their initial experiences at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, their reflections on how these experiences varied one year into the pandemic, and their perspectives on how shifting public health measures and policies shaped their work. METHODS: Drawing on collaborative research methods, this project was developed with a national working group of people with lived and living expertise of substance use. Three rounds of roundtable discussions along with two sets of semi-structured interviews were conducted with working group members from May 2020 to June 2021. A thematic analysis was co-developed by academic facilitators and the working group through deductive and indictive group coding and reflexive analysis. RESULTS: Four themes emerged from the interviews and roundtable sessions: (1) initial negative impacts of COVID-19-related public health measures; (2) societal abandonment, collective anger and grief; (3) navigating constantly shifting public health emergencies over time; and (4) leveraging lived expertise to create positive change. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic, in concert with the toxic drug crisis, presented many challenges for working group members on the frontlines to continue their work providing essential services to people who use unregulated drugs in Canada. The experiences shared by this unique group demonstrate these challenges, as well as how the immediate and long-term impacts of these dual public health emergencies provided opportunities for innovating and advocating for sustainable policy changes.
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".