We approached the analysis in two steps. First, we used LCA to identify latent classes of weekly polydrug use, based on patterns of drug type and route of administration. Second, we used logistic regression to identify demographic characteristics, HIV risk behaviors, and health outcomes that were associated with class membership. In this case, we used a combination of drug type (heroin, methamphetamine, prescription drugs, alcohol, and marijuana) and route of administration (injection, smoking, and swallowing) to define drug use profiles. In order to identify classes based on habitual (vs. episodic) use, we recoded each drug by specific route of administration into a binary variable (1 = used weekly or more frequently, 0 = used less than weekly or never). For example, heroin-injected, heroin-snorted, heroin-smoked were three separate variables coded as “used weekly or more” versus “less than weekly/never.” We then reviewed the distribution of drugs and selected drugs reported by at least 15% of the entire sample for inclusion in the LCA. Based on this standard, seven drug/administration-route combinations were included in the LCA: heroin injection, methamphetamine injection, methamphetamine smoking, methamphetamine snorting, prescription drug swallowing, binge drinking, and marijuana smoking. The prevalence of each drug assessed for inclusion in the model is depicted in appendix 1. Drugs not meeting inclusion criteria included: heroin smoke or snort; cocaine smoke, snort, or injection; simultaneous heroin & cocaine injection; simultaneous methamphetamine & cocaine injection; simultaneous methamphetamine & heroin injection; ketamine injection; oxycontin swallow, snort or injection; and prescription drug smoke, snort or injection. We then examined models with between 2 and 5 classes. Fit statistics for each model are illustrated in Table 1. Smaller values of Akaike information criteria (AIC) and Bayesian information criteria (BIC) and higher values of entropy indicate better fit. A non-significant bootstrap likelihood-ratio test (LRT) P-value indicates that more classes does not improve the analysis (Gibson, 1959 ; Hagenaars & McCutcheon, 2002 ; McCuthcheon, 1987 ). Thus, we selected a two-class solution based on the goodness-of-fit indices. After selecting the best fitting model, we used logistic regression to assess factors associated with class membership. Bivariate analyses were first conducted to determine demographic, behavioral, or health status indicators associated with class membership. Factors associated with class membership at the P < .20 level in bivariate analyses were considered for inclusion into a logistic regression model, using a manual backward stepwise approach. Variables achieving significance at the P < .05 level were retained in the final model. Models were checked for meaningful interactions and none were found to be statistically significant. Variables that produced a 10% or greater change between the crude and adjusted odds ratios were considered confounders and were retained in the final model regardless of their significance. All analyses were performed using SAS PROC LCA (Lanza, Dziak, Huang, Wagner, & Collins, 2012 ).
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol. The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Roth A.M., Armenta R.A., Wagner K.D., Roesch S.C., Bluthenthal R.N., Cuevas-Mota J, & Garfein R.S. (2014). Patterns of Drug Use, Risky Behavior, and Health Status Among Persons Who Inject Drugs Living in San Diego, California: A Latent Class Analysis. Substance use & misuse, 50(2), 205-214.
Other organizations :
San Diego State University, University of Nevada, Reno, LAC+USC Medical Center, University of California, San Diego, University of California System
Drug type (heroin, methamphetamine, prescription drugs, alcohol, and marijuana)
Route of administration (injection, smoking, and swallowing)
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to
get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required