MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904279263 · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000000476

Evaluating the Impact of Prescribed Versus Nonprescribed Benzodiazepine Use in Methadone Maintenance Therapy: Results From a Population-based Retrospective Cohort Study

2018· article· en· W2904279263 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joseph K. Eibl, Andrew S. Wilton, Alexandra M. Franklyn, Paul Kurdyak, David C. Marsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Addiction Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiscontinuationBenzodiazepineRetrospective cohort studyMethadoneOpioid use disorderOdds ratioMedical prescriptionPopulationInternal medicinePsychiatryOpioidPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Benzodiazepine (BZD) use is common in patients who are engaged in methadone as a treatment for opioid use disorder. BZD prescribing is generally discouraged for this patient population due to the increased risk of BZD dependence and BZD use disorder, medication-assisted treatment (MAT) discontinuation, and opioid-overdose death. However, some patients have concurrent mental health disorders, where BZD use may be clinically indicated. This study evaluates the impact of prescribed BZD on MAT outcomes. METHODS: Linking urine drug screening data (UDS) and prescribing information from single-payer health records, we conducted a retrospective Kaplan-Meier analysis between patients using prescribed and nonprescribed BZD with methadone treatment retention as the primary outcome. Data are from a network of 52 outpatient clinics in Ontario, Canada, between January 1, 2006 and June 30, 2013. RESULTS: We identified 3692 patients initiating methadone-assisted treatment for the first time; 76% were BZD-/UDS- (no BZD prescription and <30% screens positive for BZD); 13% were BZD+/UDS-; 6% BZD-/UDS+; and 6% BZD+/UDS+. Using 1-year treatment retention as a primary outcome, patients using nonprescribed BZD (BZD-/UDS+) were twice as likely (adjusted odds ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.53) to discontinue treatment as those not using BZD (BZD-/UDS-), or those using BZD in a prescribed manner (BZD+/UDS+). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that prescribed BZD can be used during methadone MAT without impacting a patient's retention in MAT, but nonprescribed BZD use is predictive of treatment discontinuation. Importantly, we urge both the physician and patient to seek alternative clinical options to BZD prescribing, due to the potential for developing physical dependence (and BZD use disorder) to BZD and the risks of negative interactions with opioids.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Addiction MedicineSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207