MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2378259067 · doi:10.1002/cpt.390

The effect of an abuse‐deterrent opioid formulation (OxyContin) on opioid abuse‐related outcomes in the postmarketing setting

2016· article· en· W2378259067 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Coplan, HD Chilcoat, SF Butler, Edward M. Sellers, Aditi Kadakia, V. Harikrishnan, J. David Haddox, Richard C. Dart

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersPurdue PharmaUniversity of KentuckyPurdue University
KeywordsMedicineSubstance abuseMedical prescriptionOpioidPsychiatryChronic painPsychological interventionPostmarketing surveillanceOpioid abuseAdverse effectPharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An extended-release opioid analgesic (OxyContin, OC) was reformulated with abuse-deterrent properties to deter abuse. This report examines changes in abuse through oral and nonoral routes, doctor-shopping, and fatalities in 10 studies 3.5 years after reformulation. Changes in OC abuse from 1 year before to 3 years after OC reformulation were calculated, adjusted for prescription changes. Abuse of OC decreased 48% in national poison center surveillance systems, decreased 32% in a national drug treatment system, and decreased 27% among individuals prescribed OC in claims databases. Doctor-shopping for OC decreased 50%. Overdose fatalities reported to the manufacturer decreased 65%. Abuse of other opioids without abuse-deterrent properties decreased 2 years later than OC and with less magnitude, suggesting OC decreases were not due to broader opioid interventions. Consistent with the formulation, decreases were larger for nonoral than oral abuse. Abuse-deterrent opioids may mitigate abuse and overdose risks among chronic pain patients.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.375 · 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

Citations72
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207