<p>Understanding factors that contribute to the disposal of unused opioid medication</p>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Drivers of excess controlled substance disposal behaviors are not well understood. A survey of patients who had received opioid-based medications was conducted to inform the design of future innovative drug take-back programs. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study conducted in 152 participants who received treatment with an opioid within the previous 2 years and had possession of unused medication following either switching to a different opioid or discontinuation of pain. RESULTS: Approximately one-third of patients had disposed of their unused opioid medication. Education about the importance of and appropriate methods for drug disposal was associated with a significantly increased likelihood of patients disposing of unused medication, and it was observed that patients prescribed an immediate-release/short-acting opioid were twice as likely to keep their medication compared to those prescribed an extended-release/long-acting opioid. The most commonly reported methods for disposal were via drug return kiosks and flushing the medication down the toilet. Some of the most impactful drivers of unused opioid disposal were routine practice of disposing of all unused drugs and instruction from a health care provider, and the most common driver of keeping unused medication was the desire to have it on-hand should there be a need to treat pain in the future. Over 80 % of patients indicated that they would be more likely to use a drug take-back service if they were offered compensation or if the kiosk was in a location that they visited frequently, and approximately half of the patients indicated that they would be willing to request an initial partial fill of an opioid prescription to reduce the volume of unused medication. CONCLUSION: There is a clear need to increase patient awareness about the importance and methods of proper medication disposal, and a great opportunity for health care providers to increase patient education efforts. These study findings also highlight key areas for improvement in drug take-back programs that may promote and incentivize more patients to utilize the services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".