Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid overdose and other adverse events in the USA and Canada: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted healthcare beyond COVID-19 infections. A better understanding of how COVID-19 worsened the opioid crisis has potential to inform future response efforts. OBJECTIVE: To summarize changes from the COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes regarding opioid use and misuse in the USA and Canada. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for peer-reviewed articles published between March 2020 and December 2021 that examined outcomes relevant to patients with opioid use, misuse, and opioid use disorder by comparing the period before vs after COVID-19 onset in the USA and Canada. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, assessed methodological quality and bias via Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and synthesized results. FINDINGS: Among 20 included studies, 13 (65%) analyzed service utilization, 6 (30%) analyzed urine drug testing results, and 2 (10%) analyzed naloxone dispensation. Opioid-related emergency medicine utilization increased in most studies (85%, 11/13) for both service calls (17% to 61%) and emergency department visits (42% to 122%). Urine drug testing positivity results increased in all studies (100%, 6/6) for fentanyl (34% to 138%), most (80%, 4/5) studies for heroin (-12% to 62%), and most (75%, 3/4) studies for oxycodone (0% to 44%). Naloxone dispensation was unchanged and decreased in one study each. INTERPRETATION: Significant increases in surrogate measures of the opioid crisis coincided with the onset of COVID-19. These findings serve as a call to action to redouble prevention, treatment, and harm reduction efforts for the opioid crisis as the pandemic evolves. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021236464.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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".