MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186777141 · doi:10.1080/10550887.2021.1950262

Drug type and risk behaviors associated with non-fatal overdose among people who use drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3186777141 on OpenAlexaff
Bahram Armoon, Neda SoleimanvandiAzar, Mohammad Rostami, Peter Higgs, Azadeh Bayani, Amir‐Hossein Bayat, Rasool Mohammadi, Elahe Ahounbar, Ladan Fattah Moghaddam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Addictive Diseases · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeroinHarm reductionBuprenorphinePopulationPsychological interventionDrug overdoseMeta-analysisDrugPoison controlPsychiatryEmergency medicineFamily medicineOpioidEnvironmental healthInternal medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study aimed to determine the association between drug type, risk behaviors and non-fatal overdose among people who use drugs (PWUD). We searched for studies in English published before February 1, 2021, on PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science to identify primary studies on the factors associated with non-fatal overdose among PWUD. After reviewing for study duplicates, the full-text of selected articles were assessed for eligibility using Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes (PICO) criteria. After a detailed assessment of over 13,845 articles, a total of 49 studies met the eligibility criteria. We found that non-injection opioid use, heroin injection, cocaine use, concurrent use of buprenorphine and benzodiazepines, benzodiazepine use, incarceration, injecting drugs, and duration of injecting were associated with greater odds of non-fatal overdose among PWUD. The findings of the current meta-analysis support the requirement to improve suitable harm reduction strategies for drug users, such as peer-based overdose management, and further focusing on the need to balance the current emphasis on enforcement-based responses to illegal drug use with health-related interventions.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.032
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Addictive DiseasesSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207