When a Pandemic Meets an Epidemic: How COVID-19 has Affected Treatment Access Among Individuals with Problematic Opioid Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on treatment access among individuals (n=225) presenting with problematic opioid use to the Rapid Access Addiction Medicine (RAAM) clinic at The Royal in Ottawa, Ontario.The COVID-19 pandemic led to government-imposed restrictions and service limitations.The RAAM clinic underwent two primary changes: (1) delivering services virtually rather than in-person appointments and (2) shifting from walk-in services to appointment-based services.The study was a retrospective chart review and data were extracted from an electronic health record, Meditech.Participants were patients who had an initial presentation to the RAAM clinic between March 16 th , 2019, and March 15 th , 2021, and had used opioids within the 30 days prior to their visit.Results indicated that RAAM changes decreased some groups' access to care such that fewer patients experiencing precarious housing and mental health comorbidities presented to the RAAM clinic after the onset of the pandemic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".