MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412106993 · doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104915

Scapegoated communities, shared struggles: A call for solidarity with people who use drugs and queer and trans people

2025· article· en· W4412106993 on OpenAlexaff
Kira London-Nadeau, Christian Barborini, Rebecca Haines‐Saah, Misha Bazarov, Sean Bristowe, Misha Khorkhordina, Mélodie Lemay-Gaulin, Catherine Gorka, Robert‐Paul Juster, Heath D'Alessio, Nicholas Chadi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Drug Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerSolidaritySociologyGender studiesPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efforts to control, repress, and punish drug use and queer and trans existence are rising as right-wing extremism becomes increasingly mainstream. These connected efforts are seen through the stifling of bodily autonomy and agency using criminal-legal, biomedical and political apparatuses, and have been executed similarly for people who use drugs and queer and trans people alike. This is most notable for those who exist at the intersection of these communities. Both groups have withstood attempts at manufacturing internal hierarchies - always at the expense of those who are already most marginalized - and eradication and erasure from public existence altogether. In this editorial, we argue that these mechanisms of oppression link not only the struggles of queer and trans people and people who use drugs, but also threaten those outside of these groups. As such, this paper is an urgent call to cultivate shared solidarity and action based in theorizing developed by people who use drugs and queer and trans communities. These tools support resistance against oppression not only through the reclamation of bodily autonomy and agency, but also by centering pleasures, desires, dreams, and the ability to imagine 'utopian' futures and versions of ourselves.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0290.072
Scholarly communication0.0220.023
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0180.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Drug PolicySame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207