Measuring benefits of opioid misuse treatment for economic evaluation: health‐related quality of life of opioid‐dependent individuals and their spouses as assessed by a sample of the US population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To understand how the general public views the quality of life effects of opioid misuse and opioid use disorder on an individual and his/her spouse, measured in terms used in economic evaluations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional internet survey of a US population-representative respondent panel conducted December 2013-January 2014. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2054 randomly selected adults; 51.1% male (before weighting). MEASUREMENTS: Mean (95% confidence interval) and median health 'utility' for six opioid misuse and treatment outcomes: active injection misuse; active prescription misuse; methadone maintenance therapy at initiation and when stabilized in treatment; and buprenorphine therapy at initiation and when stabilized. Utility is a numerical representation of health-related quality of life used in economic evaluations to 'adjust' estimated survival to include peoples' preferences for health states. Utilities are determined by surveying the general population to estimate the value they assign to particular health states on a scale where 0 = the value of being dead and 1.0 = the value of being in perfect health. Spouse spillover utility is assigned to a spouse of an individual who is in a particular health state. FINDINGS: Mean individual utility ranged from 0.574 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.538, 0.611] for active injection opioid misuse to 0.766 for stabilized buprenorphine therapy (95% CI = 0.738, 0.795), with other states in between. Female respondents assigned higher utility to the active prescription misuse and buprenorphine therapy at initiation states than did males (P < 0.05); all other states did not differ by respondent gender. Mean spousal utilities were significantly lower than 1.0 but mostly higher than individual utility, and were similar between male and female respondents. CONCLUSIONS: In the opinion of the US public, injection opioid misuse results in worse health-related quality of life than prescription misuse, and methadone therapy results in worse health-related quality of life than buprenorphine therapy. Spouses are negatively affected by their partner's opioid misuse and early treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".