MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147057496

Buprenorphine: new treatment of opioid addiction in primary care.

2011· article· en· W2147057496 on OpenAlexaff
Meldon Kahan, Anita Srivastava, Alice Ordean, Sharon Cirone

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuprenorphineMethadoneMedicineAbstinenceOpioidObservational studyAddictionMEDLINEOpiate Substitution TreatmentIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineAnesthesiaPsychiatryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To review the use of buprenorphine for opioid-addicted patients in primary care. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: The MEDLINE database was searched for literature on buprenorphine from 1980 to 2009. Controlled trials, meta-analyses, and large observational studies were reviewed. MAIN MESSAGE: Buprenorphine is a partial opioid agonist that relieves opioid withdrawal symptoms and cravings for 24 hours or longer. Buprenorphine has a much lower risk of overdose than methadone and is preferred for patients at high risk of methadone toxicity, those who might need shorter-term maintenance therapy, and those with limited access to methadone treatment. The initial dose should be given only after the patient is in withdrawal. The therapeutic dose range for most patients is 8 to 16 mg daily. It should be dispensed daily by the pharmacist with gradual introduction of take-home doses. Take-home doses should be introduced more slowly for patients at higher risk of abuse and diversion (eg, injection drug users). Patients who fail buprenorphine treatment should be referred for methadone- or abstinence-based treatment. CONCLUSION: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment of opioid addiction and can be safely prescribed by primary care physicians.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207