MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209585671 · doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108651

Beyond harm-producing versus harm-reducing: A qualitative meta-synthesis of people who use drugs' perspectives of and experiences with the extramedical use and diversion of buprenorphine

2021· review· en· W3209585671 on OpenAlexafffund
Abhimanyu Sud, Fabio Salamanca‐Buentello, Daniel Z. Buchman, Pamela Sabioni, Umair Majid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Substance Abuse Treatment · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of TorontoLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsBuprenorphineOpioid use disorderMethadoneQualitative researchHarm reductionHarmFocus groupMedicinePsychologyGrounded theoryPsychiatryOpioidNursingSocial psychologySociologyPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This review synthesizes the literature on the perspectives and experiences of people who use drugs to better understand motivations and behaviors related to the extramedical use and diversion of buprenorphine. Given the particular social construction of buprenorphine against methadone, and the centrality of concerns around extramedical use in delivering opioid agonist therapies, a focus on extramedical buprenorphine use can provide an important lens through which to analyze treatment for opioid use disorder. This review is framed within persistent tensions between potential harm-producing versus harm-reducing effects of extramedical use that have long been described for opioid agonist therapies. METHODS: The research team conducted a qualitative meta-synthesis based on a systematic search of eight databases as well as hand searching. The review includes all primary qualitative and mixed-methods studies related to the perspectives and experiences of people who use drugs on extramedical buprenorphine use. The study team carried out three rounds of qualitative coding using NVivo 12, and constructivist grounded theory and the constant comparative method informed the synthesis. RESULTS: The review includes twenty-one studies. Findings are organized into the following three themes: 1) the experiences of people who use drugs (PWUD) with extramedical use of buprenorphine and their motivations to engage in it (including the desire to self-medicate and achieve "stability", to manage ongoing use of other opioids, and to "get high"); 2) the relationship between extramedical use and formal medical opioid agonist therapy programs; and 3) the established drug economy of extramedical buprenorphine. CONCLUSIONS: The review identified varied and often divergent perspectives and experiences with extramedical buprenorphine use. An examination of the reported "normalizing" effects of extramedical buprenorphine suggests this practice as extending medicalized discipline beyond the clinical environment. Taken together, these findings identify a need to move beyond the tension of harm-reducing versus harm-producing effects toward forms of health care and promotion that focus on the needs, perspectives, and priorities of people who use drugs.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.096
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.007
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Substance Abuse TreatmentSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207