MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292336227 · doi:10.1186/s12954-022-00670-0

Determining the feasibility for an overdose prevention line to support substance users who use alone

2022· article· en· W4292336227 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kim B. Ritchie, S. Monty Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueHarm Reduction Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhoneMedicineOpioid overdoseService (business)Medical emergencyOpioid(+)-NaloxoneBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The majority of opioid-related deaths occur in suburban communities with people who use alone in their homes. BACKGROUND: To reach individuals who use substances alone, Grenfell Ministries, a not for profit agency in Hamilton Ontario created a phone-based supervision service to target individuals who use substances alone. METHODOLOGY: Grenfell implemented a phone line service initially as a 3-month pilot eventually operationalized to a 24/7 phoneline to determine utilization of the service and test operational feasibility. Metrics such as timing of use, number of unique clients using the service and substances used were measured. RESULTS: The line was provincially utilized. Between February 1st and December 10, 2020, the line was used 64 times. Most calls occurred in the evening, with fentanyl being the most used substance. EMS was dispatched 3 times for overdoses, of which 2 individuals were successfully resuscitated, and one individual's status being unknown. CONCLUSION: The overdose prevention line can be implemented to support individuals who use alone. The service can successfully reduce risk of death from individuals who use alone and could be a valuable tool in addressing the opioid crisis. Further study needs to be conducted to determine its efficacy and safety in supporting clients who use alone.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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