MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6923509022 · doi:10.14288/1.0447617

An implementation science study of an intersectoral (university – community – health authority) drug checking model

2025· article· en· W6923509022 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarthquake and Disaster Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModel checkingWork (physics)Key (lock)MEDLINEHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. In British Columbia (BC), Canada, unregulated drug poisoning is the leading cause of death for people aged 10 to 59 years. While drug checking is an effective harm reduction intervention for people who use drugs (PWUD), the expense of associated technologies and the under-resourcing of harm reduction organizations hinders the implementation of these services. Globally, universities are increasingly assisting with the implementation and delivery of drug checking services, but little is known about the uptake, operations, and impacts of these partnered services. This study focuses on one such service delivered on a university campus and in the surrounding city of Kelowna, BC. Methods. This study used critical social theory, harm reduction principles, integrated knowledge translation, and the RE-AIM implementation science framework to meet the study’s objective of assessing the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of the university-partnered service. Data were collected from June to December 2023 using one-on-one semi-structured interviews, online surveys, and arts-based data with decision makers, drug checkers, and students and community members who used drugs. Results. Participants (n=26) included seven decision makers, six drug checkers, four students, and nine community members. Service reach was enhanced through word-of-mouth promotion but inhibited by fears of criminalization and stigma as well as locations and hours. The service effectively reduced stigma and the risk of harm for service users and their social networks, as well as improved community service users’ quality of life. Decision makers and drug checkers adopted the service to reduce drug-related harms and for the complimentary nature of the intersectoral partnerships but were challenged by a lack of policies and support tools. Participants valued how services were implemented and emphasized the importance of peer collaborations. Decision makers attempted to maintain the service through improved accessibility and memorandums of understanding. Discussion. This study contributes valuable knowledge regarding drug checking in the university context and the role of universities in delivering community drug checking services. These contributions are discussed in the context of extant drug checking literature and demonstrate how universities might help to overcome challenges in the implementation and delivery of drug checking services for diverse populations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicEarthquake and Disaster Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207