MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W161362530 · doi:10.1155/2003/184247

Attitudes Toward Opioid Use for Chronic Pain: A Canadian Physician Survey

2003· article· en· W161362530 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Research and Management · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityCapital District Health AuthorityDalhousie UniversitySt Joseph's Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic painCodeineAcetaminophenOpioidPalliative careMedical prescriptionMorphineAnalgesicCancer painPhysical therapyCancerInternal medicineAnesthesiaNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To measure chronic pain patient volumes seen in primary care practice; to determine what medications physicians choose for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic pain; to identify barriers to the use of opioids in the treatment of chronic pain; and to assess physicians' attitudes toward the current management of chronic pain in Canada. DESIGN: A computer-assisted telephone survey of 100 regionally representative Canadian physicians with a defined interest in palliative care (PC, n=30) or noncancer pain (GP, n=70). SETTING: A survey was conducted by Ipsos-Reid in June 2001. Only physicians who met the eligibility criteria of having written 20 or more prescriptions for moderate to severe pain in the preceding four weeks or having devoted 20% of time to palliative care were eligible to participate. RESULTS: In one month, the average number of patients with moderate to severe chronic pain seen by PCs was 94.2; the average seen by GPs was 44.7. The pain experienced by 83.3% of GP patients was noncancer related. For chronic cancer pain, an opioid analgesic was the treatment of choice of 79% of physicians (48% preferred morphine, 21% codeine, 10% other). For moderate to severe chronic noncancer pain, opioids were the first-line treatment of only 32% of physicians (16% preferred codeine, 16% major opioids) because a significant number preferred either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (29%) or acetaminophen (16%). Thirty-five per cent of GPs and 23% of PCs would never use opioids for noncancer pain, even when described as severe. Chronic pain was deemed by 68% of physicians to be inadequately managed. Almost 60% thought that pain management could be enhanced by improved physician education. Identified barriers to opioid use included addiction potential (37%) and side effects (25%). Seventeen per cent of GPs and 10% of PCs thought that regulatory sanctions limited opioid prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Even among physicians experienced in chronic pain treatment, there is a reluctance to use opioids for severe nonmalignant pain. One-half of the survey participants believed that there was a need for improved physician education in pain management, including the use of opioids.

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.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.239 · 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