MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749496257 · doi:10.1186/s12954-017-0183-9

Rationale for cannabis-based interventions in the opioid overdose crisis

2017· letter· en· W2749496257 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

VenueHarm Reduction Journal · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarm reductionMedicineCannabisPublic healthOpioid overdosePsychological interventionOpioidHealth psychologyMethadonePsychiatryIntensive care medicine(+)-NaloxoneNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: North America is currently in the grips of a crisis rooted in the use of licit and illicit opioid-based analgesics. Drug overdose is the leading cause of accidental death in Canada and the US, and the growing toll of opioid-related morbidity and mortality requires a diversity of novel therapeutic and harm reduction-based interventions. Research suggests that increasing adult access to both medical and recreational cannabis has significant positive impacts on public health and safety as a result of substitution effect. Observational and epidemiological studies have found that medical cannabis programs are associated with a reduction in the use of opioids and associated morbidity and mortality. AIMS AND METHODS: This paper presents an evidence-based rationale for cannabis-based interventions in the opioid overdose crisis informed by research on substitution effect, proposing three important windows of opportunity for cannabis for therapeutic purposes (CTP) to play a role in reducing opioid use and interrupting the cycle towards opioid use disorder: 1) prior to opioid introduction in the treatment of chronic pain; 2) as an opioid reduction strategy for those patients already using opioids; and 3) as an adjunct therapy to methadone or suboxone treatment in order to increase treatment success rates. The commentary explores potential obstacles and limitations to these proposed interventions, and as well as strategies to monitor their impact on public health and safety. CONCLUSION: The growing body of research supporting the medical use of cannabis as an adjunct or substitute for opioids creates an evidence-based rationale for governments, health care providers, and academic researchers to consider the implementation and assessment of cannabis-based interventions in the opioid crisis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.308 · 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