The association of gender and persistent opioid use following an acute pain event: A retrospective population based study of renal colic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study aims to explore gender-related differences in persistent opioid use following an acute pain episode and evaluate potential explanatory variables. METHODS: This retrospective population-based study using administrative databases included all opioid-naïve patients in Ontario with renal colic between 2013 and 2017. The primary outcome was to assess any association between persistent opioid use at 3-6 months by gender. Key confounding covariates and explanatory variables examined included both care- and patient-related factors, specifically past evidence of mental health diagnoses. RESULTS: The dataset of 64,240 males and 37,656 females demonstrated that 8.7% of males and 9.6% of females had evidence of persistent opioid use 3-6 months after presentation (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05, 1.17). Females had a higher incidence of mental health services utilization [44.5% vs 29.6% (p<0.001)] and were more likely to be on a provincial disability program [5.1% vs 3.8% (p<0.001)]. Age, income quintile, mental health diagnoses and dose of opioid prescribed were associated with the primary outcome in both genders. On adjusted analysis for multiple confounding and explanatory variables, females were still more likely than males to demonstrate persistent opioid use (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01, 1.13) with even more pronounced associations at 1-2 years. INTERPRETATION: After controlling for key covariates, females are at slightly higher risk of demonstrating long term opioid use following an episode of renal colic. Evidence of prior mental health service utilization and acute colic care did not appear to significantly explain these observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".