Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Drug Policy. 2021 Jul 8;96:103354. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103354

Table 5.

Association of drug use stigma with injection drug use behaviors among active people who inject drugs in the past 6 months.

Drug use stigma subscale Daily injection drug use
Shared needles/syringes
Multiple injection partners
Injection drug use in public spaces
%a OR (95% CI)b aOR (95% CI)b,c %a OR (95% CI)b aOR (95% CI)b,c %a OR (95% CI)b aOR (95%CI)b,c %a OR (95% CI)b,c aOR (95% CI)b,c

Enacted stigma
Never 53.9 Ref. Ref. 33.4 Ref. Ref. 60.1 Ref. Ref. 70.0 Ref. Ref.
Ever 68.3 1.27 (1.00–1.61) 1.30 (0.96–1.74) 44.2 1.38 (1.17–1.62) 1.34 (1.16–1.55) 60.8 1.52 (1.21–1.92) 1.46 (1.15–1.85) 79.0 1.31 (1.09–1.57) 1.24 (1.01–1.53)
Vicarious stigma
Never 57.5 Ref. Ref. 36.7 Ref. Ref. 63.6 Ref. Ref. 64.0 Ref. Ref.
Ever 61.6 1.04 (0.77–1.41) 1.17 (0.82–1.65) 39.0 1.06 (0.86–1.30) 1.10 (0.84–1.44) 62.5 1.30 (1.06–1.59) 1.28 (1.05–1.56) 77.5 1.46 (1.20–1.76) 1.46 (1.17–1.81)
Felt normative stigma d
<25th 58.8 Ref. Ref. 35.4 Ref. Ref. 60.0 Ref. Ref. 68.6 Ref. Ref.
25–75th 58.1 0.96 (0.70–1.33) 1.08 (0.80–1.47) 36.9 1.20 (0.92–1.57) 1.22 (0.89–1.67) 60.5 1.14 (0.80–1.62) 1.16 (0.81–1.66) 74.1 1.17 (0.89–1.56) 1.22 (0.93–1.61)
>75th 69.1 1.00 (0.69–1.45) 0.99 (0.71–1.36) 44.0 1.22 (0.88–1.67) 1.18 (0.87–1.60) 73.2 1.53 (1.00–2.33) 1.52 (0.99–2.33) 80.5 2.29 (1.52–3.47) 2.31 (1.49–3.59)
Internalized stigma e
<25th 49.4 Ref. Ref. 27.4 Ref. Ref. 62.8 Ref. Ref. 68.8 Ref. Ref.
25–75th 61.7 0.98 (0.63–1.53) 1.10 (0.82–1.48) 41.0 1.32 (1.07–1.63) 1.37 (1.14–1.64) 62.9 1.28 (1.04–1.58) 1.31 (1.07–1.59) 73.6 1.03 (0.73–1.46) 1.07 (0.77–1.47)
>75th 67.2 0.90 (0.53–1.54) 0.99 (0.64–1.52) 41.6 1.12 (0.69–1.83) 1.20 (0.80–1.78) 62.6 1.03 (0.73–1.46) 1.05 (0.74–1.48) 79.4 1.83 (1.22–2.74) 1.92 (1.33–2.79)

Note: This analysis was restricted to participants who reported injection drug use in the past 6 mo. (n = 9309).

a

Prevalence of each behavior was estimated using a composite weight of the relative city size and RDS-II weights.

b

Odds ratios were estimated from multilevel logistic regression models with a random-intercept for each city and scaled RDS-II weights.

c

A separate multivariable model was used for each stigma-behavior relationship shown and included adjustment for age group, gender, northeast region, educational attainment, homelessness, history of incarceration in the past 6 mo., alcohol use/dependence (AUDIT), and HIV status.

d

Cut-offs are based on the population-level distribution in the overall study population (i.e.. 25th–75th percentile: 1.0–2.4).

e

Cut-offs are based on the population-level distribution in the overall study population (i.e., 25th–75th percentile: 1.0–2.6).