MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784605569 · doi:10.1186/s13643-018-0682-0

Treatment outcomes in patients with opioid use disorder initiated by prescription: a systematic review protocol

2018· review· en· W2784605569 on OpenAlexaff
Nitika Sanger, Meha Bhatt, Laura Zielinski, Stephanie Sanger, Hamnah Shahid, Bianca Bantoto, M. Constantine Samaan, Russell J. de Souza, Zainab Samaan

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University Medical CentreImpactMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLPsycINFOMEDLINEMedical prescriptionData extractionOpioid use disorderProtocol (science)OpioidFamily medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicinePsychological interventionNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In North America, opioid use has become a public health crisis with policy makers declaring it a state of emergency. Opioid substitution therapy (OST) is a harm-reduction method used in treating opioid use disorder. While OST has shown to be successful in improving treatment outcomes, there is still a great degree of variability among patients. This cohort of patients has shifted from young males using heroin to a greater number of older people and women using prescription opioids. The primary objective of this review is to examine the literature on the association between the first exposure to opioids through prescription versus illicit use and OST treatment outcomes. METHOD: An electronic search will be conducted on the EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. Reviewers will then conduct full-text data extraction using a pilot-tested data extraction form in duplicate. A third author will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted along with a sensitivity analysis for all included studies. Qualitative summary of the evidence will be provided, and when possible, a meta-analysis will be conducted, along with heterogeneity calculation. The reporting of this protocol follows the PRISMA-P. DISCUSSION: We expect that this review will help determine whether patients that were initially exposed to opioids through a prescription differ in OST treatment outcomes in comparison to people who used opioids through illicit means. We hope that this review will provide evidence related to prescription opioids exposure and future treatment outcomes, which will aid clinicians in their decisions to prescribe opioids or not for specific populations at risk. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017058143.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.086
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0860.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.018
Bibliometrics0.0150.014
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0090.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.009

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207