MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944919604 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2019.305053

Suspected Heroin Overdoses in US Emergency Departments, 2017–2018

2019· article· en· W2944919604 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alana M. Vivolo‐Kantor, Brooke Hoots, Felicita David, R. Matthew Gladden

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsHeroinMedicineEmergency departmentQuarter (Canadian coin)Public healthOpioid overdoseDisease controlDrug overdoseWest virginiaDemographyEmergency medicineEnvironmental healthPoison controlMedical emergencyOpioidPsychiatryGeography(+)-Naloxone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. To describe changes in suspected heroin overdose emergency department (ED) visits. Methods. We analyzed quarterly and yearly changes in heroin overdoses during 2017–2018 by using data from 23 states and jurisdictions (including the District of Columbia) funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Enhanced State Opioid Overdose Surveillance program. The analyses included the Pearson χ 2 test to detect significant changes. Results. Both sexes, all age groups, and some states exhibited increases from quarter 1 (Q1) 2017 to Q2 2017 and significant decreases in both quarters from Q3 2017 to Q1 2018 in heroin overdose ED visits. Overall, there was a significant yearly decline of 21.5% in heroin overdose ED visits. Three states had significant yearly increases (Illinois, Indiana, and Utah), and 9 states (Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, West Virginia, and Wisconsin) and the District of Columbia had significant decreases. Conclusions. We identified decreases in heroin overdose ED visits from 2017 through 2018, but these declines were not consistent among states. Even with the possibility of a stabilization or slowing of this epidemic, it is important that the field of public health and its partners implement strategies to prevent overdoses and target emerging hot spots.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207