Should Codeine Still be Considered a WHO Essential Medicine?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Codeine continues to be widely used as an analgesic, antidiarrhoeal and antitussive agent. Its analgesic effect depends on its biotransformation to morphine, a strong opioid. The highly variable biotransformation of codeine to morphine, catalysed by CYP2D6, underlies the pronounced interindividual variability of its analgesic response. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that codeine administered alone has the poorest analgesic effect among all commonly used analgesics in acute postoperative pain. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that the low dose of codeine contributes to the pain-relieving effect of the non-opioid component in combination analgesic products. In addition, there is a lack of reliable clinical evidence to support the use of codeine as an antitussive in acute or chronic cough. Codeine use, through its active metabolite morphine, has the potential to lead to abuse and dependence. The World Health Organization (WHO) removed codeine from the essential medicines list for children in 2011. Based on the available information in the scientific literature on the efficacy and safety of codeine, the WHO should seriously consider removing it also from the list of essential medicines for adults, which would be a strong signal for all health professionals to prescribe and dispense codeine with the utmost caution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".