MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193914870 · doi:10.1186/s12954-021-00537-w

A drug-related Good Samaritan Law and calling emergency medical services for drug overdoses in a Canadian setting

2021· article· en· W3193914870 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Soroush Moallef, JinCheol Choi, M‐J Milloy, Kora DeBeck, Thomas Kerr, Kanna Hayashi

Bibliographic record

VenueHarm Reduction Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseSt. Paul's HospitalSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicineResidenceEmergency medical servicesOdds ratioLogistic regression(+)-NaloxoneMedical emergencyDemographyConfidence intervalEmergency medicinePsychiatryFamily medicineSociologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs (PWUD) are known to fear calling emergency medical services (EMS) for drug overdoses. In response, drug-related Good Samaritan Laws (GSLs) have been widely adopted in the USA and Canada to encourage bystanders to call emergency medical services (EMS) in the event of a drug overdose. However, the effect of GSLs on EMS-calling behaviours has been understudied. We sought to identify factors associated with EMS-calling, including the enactment of the Canadian GSL in May 2017, among PWUD in Vancouver, Canada, a setting with an ongoing overdose crisis. METHODS: Data were derived from three prospective cohort studies of PWUD in Vancouver in 2014-2018. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with EMS-calling among PWUD who witnessed an overdose event. An interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was employed to assess the impact of GSL on monthly prevalence of EMS-calling. RESULTS: Among 540 eligible participants, 321 (59%) were males and 284 (53%) reported calling EMS. In multivariable analysis, ever having administered naloxone three or more times (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-3.74) and residence in the Downtown Eastside (DTES) neighbourhood of Vancouver (AOR 1.96; 95% CI 1.23-3.13) were positively associated with EMS-calling, while living in a single occupancy hotel (SRO) was negatively associated with EMS-calling (AOR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30-0.86). The post-GSL enactment period was not associated with EMS-calling (AOR 0.81; 95% CI 0.52-1.25). The ITS found no significant difference in the monthly prevalence of EMS-calling between pre- and post-GSL enactment periods. CONCLUSION: We observed EMS being called about half the time and the GSL did not appear to encourage EMS-calling. We also found that individuals living in SROs were less likely to call EMS, which raises concern given that fatal overdose cases are concentrated in SROs in our setting. The link between many naloxone administrations and EMS-calling could indicate that those with prior experience in responding to overdose events were more willing to call EMS. Increased efforts are warranted to ensure effective emergency responses for drug overdoses among PWUD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHarm Reduction JournalSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207