Contributing Factors to Methadone-Related Deaths in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To identify factors contributing to methadone-related deaths in Ontario in 2004, demographic factors, methadone blood levels, evidence of concurrent drug use, the source of methadone (prescribed or illicit), and its contribution in exacerbating preexistent disease were studied to identify users at risk for methadone toxicity and death. This retrospective study reviewed postmortem data, autopsy reports, police reports, hospital data, and postmortem toxicological analyses available in the Ontario Chief Coroner's Information System. There were 54 cases with methadone detected in postmortem blood samples. Of total, 9 cases were not included in the study because of incomplete documentation. About 11 deaths were due to methadone toxicity alone; 25 deaths were due to combined methadone and other drug toxicity (notably cocaine and alcohol); 7 deaths were due to the exacerbation of a preexisting disease by methadone; 1 death was due to disease alone, and 1 death was due to trauma sustained in a motor vehicle collision. A significant number of methadone-related deaths were due to illicit methadone ingestion, which exceeded the opioid tolerance level. The source of methadone in these cases was unknown. Drug addicts, unaware of the hazard of consuming other illicit or prescription drugs concurrently, are at risk. This study demonstrated that methadone toxicity is enhanced by underlying disease, especially in individuals with underlying cardiac and pulmonary pathology.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 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".