Empirical versus perceived risk for hepatitis C in a cohort of not in treatment opioid users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Risk perception is a key component of theories of health behaviour upon which knowledge-based prevention strategies for HCV are predicated. Objectives. Determine the relationship between empirical and perceived HCV risk in a Canadian population of illicit opioid users, and differentiate between those who more accurately perceive and those who overestimate or underestimate their risk. Design. Analysis of the OPICAN cohort, a Canadian five-centered study of opioid users not in treatment. Methods. Empirical risk is correlated with perceived risk using Kendall's Tau beta. A multinomial logistic regression of concordance group on age, sex, relationship status, housing and income is performed. Results. Perceived risk is positively associated with empirical risk (Kendall's Tau = 0.085, p = 0.081). Age, sex, housing and relationship are significant predictors of concordance group membership (n = 288). Conclusion. The composition of concordance groups is described, thus providing targets for public health practitioners to further study, and, ultimately, implement tailored HCV prevention interventions.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".