MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280502567 · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2022.100271

A scoping review of opioid harm reduction interventions for equity-deserving populations

2022· review· en· W4280502567 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katrina Milaney, Rebecca Haines‐Saah, Brenlea Farkas, Oluwaseun Egunsola, Liza Mastikhina, Sage Brown, Diane Lorenzetti, Brian Hansen, Kerry McBrien, Katherine Rittenbach, Leslie Hill, Claire O’Gorman, Christopher J. Doig, Jason Cabaj, Caitlin Stokvis, Fiona Clement

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHarm reductionPsychological interventionIndigenousMedicineHarmPopulationOutreachFamily medicinePsychiatryPsychologyEnvironmental healthPublic healthPolitical scienceNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Morbidity and mortality associated with opioid use has become a North American crisis. Harm reduction is an evidence-based approach to substance use. Targeted harm reduction strategies that consider the needs of specific populations are required. The objective of this scoping review was to document the range of opioid harm reduction interventions across equity-deserving populations including racialized groups, Indigenous peoples, LGBTQIA2S+, people with disabilities, and women. Methods: Ten databases were searched from inception to July 5th, 2021. Terms for harm reduction and opioid use formed the central concepts of the search. We included studies that: (1) assessed the development, implementation, and/or evaluation of harm reduction interventions for opioid use, and (2) reported health-related outcomes or presented perspectives that directly related to experiences receiving or administering harm reduction interventions, (3) were completed within an equity-deserving population and (4) were completed in New Zealand, Australia, Canada or the US. A knowledge map was developed a-priori based on literature outlining different types of harm reduction interventions and supplemented by the expertise of the research team. Findings: = 11, 73%). The remaining four studies included: overdose prevention; drug testing equipment; and outreach, peer support, and educational programs for safer use. Nine studies focused on women, primarily pregnant/post-partum women, three focused on Indigenous peoples, and three studies included racialized groups. No studies were identified that provided any information on persons with a disability or members of the LGBTQIA2S+ population. Interpretation: The scant opioid specific harm reduction literature on equity-deserving populations to date has primarily focused on OAT programs and is focused primarily on women. There is a need for more targeted research to address the diverse social experiences of people who use drugs and the spectrum of harm reduction interventions that are needed. There is also a need to acknowledge the history of harm reduction as a drug-user activist movement aimed at challenging bio-medical paradigms of drug use. Further, there is a need to recognize that academic research may be contributing to health inequity by not prioritizing research with this lens. Funding: This research was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.607
GPT teacher head0.590
Teacher spread0.017 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Regional Health - AmericasSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207