Increasing awareness about HIV prevention among young people who initiated injection drug use in a Canadian setting, 1988–2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background—Globally, harm reduction interventions, including needle and syringe programs (NSPs), have been shown to reduce HIV risks among people who inject drugs (PWID). However, little is known about the impact of these efforts on the circumstances of first injection. Therefore, we sought to identify changes in the awareness about HIV prevention and syringe borrowing at the time of first injection drug use in Vancouver, Canada, during a period of NSP expansion. Methods—Data were drawn from prospective cohorts of PWID in Vancouver, who initiated injecting between 1988 and 2014. Multivariable regression was used to assess changes in the awareness about HIV and NSPs and syringe borrowing behaviour at first injection against calendar year of first injection. Results—Among 1,044 participants (36.9% female), at the time of first injection 73.9% reported having known syringe sharing was an HIV risk, 54.1% reported having heard of NSPs, and 7.8% reported having borrowed a syringe used by others. In multivariable analyses, calendar year offirst injection was independently and positively associated with awareness about HIV (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR]: 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06, 1.11) and awareness about NSPs (APR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.24). While calendar year of first injection was significantly and negatively associated with syringe borrowing at first injection in bivariable analyses, the association did not remain significant in multivariable analyses (adjusted odds ratio: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.14). Conclusions—We found that awareness about HIV and NSPs at first injection have increased over time amongst PWID in this setting. However, declining trends in syringe borrowing at first injection were not determined after adjustment for socio-demographic characteristics. This suggests that HIV prevention efforts may have contributed to increased awareness about HIV prevention, but further research is needed to identify sub-populations at heightened risk of HIV at first injection.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".