MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308368211 · doi:10.1089/jchc.21.07.0063

Cost Analysis of Buprenorphine Extended-Release Injection Versus Sublingual Buprenorphine/Naloxone Tablets in a Correctional Setting

2022· article· en· W4308368211 on OpenAlexaff
James S.H. Wong, Sarah Masson, Alan Huang, Deanna Romm, Maylene Fong, Tony Porter, Nader Sharifi, Pouya Azar, Nickie Mathew

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Correctional Health Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British ColumbiaVancouver General HospitalProvincial Health Services AuthorityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuprenorphineMedicine(+)-NaloxoneOpioid use disorderAnesthesiaOpioidOpioid overdoseSyringePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Incarcerated clients experience high rates of opioid use disorder and overdose. It is critical that opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is provided in correctional facilities. However, few receive OAT due to concerns about diversion, misuse, and safety. Buprenorphine extended-release (BUP-XR), a monthly buprenorphine depot injection, could be especially advantageous in the correctional setting as it can prevent diversion and misuse, saving staff resources and time. An injection of BUP-XR is costly compared with a monthly supply of buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX) tablets. We demonstrate that when factoring in the added costs of medication preparation, administration, monitoring, and personnel, it is more economical to provide BUP-XR than BUP/NX. Other facilities, by utilizing our cost breakdown, can determine whether BUP-XR is economically advantageous at their own facility.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Correctional Health CareSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207