MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4364351678 · doi:10.1111/add.16204

Prescribing psychologists: Forgotten providers in the battle against opioid use disorder

2023· letter· en· W4364351678 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Phillip M. Hughes, Derek Phillips, E. Blake Fagan

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel HillAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsBuprenorphineOpioid use disorderWaiverLegislationMedicineFamily preservationSanctionsPolitical sciencePsychiatryOpioidNursingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The opioid overdose crisis has claimed the lives of nearly 1million people in the United States since 1999, including almost 100 000 in 2020 [1], a problem that worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic [2]. Buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist, is one of several medications recognized as a life-saving treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) [3]. Access to buprenorphine in the United States has long been hindered by extensive regulatory barriers, with health-care providers being required to complete several hours of additional training and seek a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) waiver in order to prescribe buprenorphine for OUD. As part of the bipartisan 2023 omnibus bill, President Joe Biden signed the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act, which eliminated these arduous requirements for providers seeking to prescribe buprenorphine for OUD [4]. However, not all providers receive the benefits of the MAT Act, due to scope-of-practice regulations at the state level. From 3 March 2023, six states now currently allow qualified psychologists seek prescriptive authority (RxP; Table 1), and there were nearly 250 prescribing psychologists in the United States from early 2023 (Dr. Derek Phillips, personal communication) [5, 6]. Furthermore, several states have RxP bills under consideration [7-9]. While RxP is currently limited to the United States, interest is growing in other countries, with professional psychological associations in Canada and England exploring such policies [10, 11]. Additional interest has been expressed by individuals in Brazil, Norway, the Netherlands, Croatia, Taiwan and South Africa [12, 13]. Although additional specific requirements vary between states, all prescribing psychologists complete a 2-year post-doctoral Master of Science in clinical psychopharmacology (MSCP) degree and pass a national psychopharmacology qualifying examination [5]. The MSCP is designed to equip psychologists with the technical knowledge necessary to prescribe psychotropic medications and provides extensive training in pharmacology, psychopharmacology, physiology, neuroscience and clinical pharmacotherapeutics. Training on opioids at both the receptor and drug levels is included in the program. Despite this extensive training, the RxP laws in every state except New Mexico explicitly prohibit prescribing psychologists from prescribing opioids, including buprenorphine. As a result, prescribing psychologists are legally restricted from the use of evidence-based pharmacotherapy for OUD. Importantly, there is a substantial need for additional providers to treat OUD in the states with RxP laws, with age-adjusted opioid overdose rates ranging from 14.3 to 42.7 per 100 000 people [1]. While the restriction on opioid prescribing was originally intended as a safety precaution against a growing crisis, buprenorphine is a partial opioid agonist and therefore significantly safer than other opioids. Opioid overdose deaths rarely involve buprenorphine (and almost never as the only drug) [14], and buprenorphine misuse is primarily performed to self-treat withdrawal symptoms, rather than to induce euphoric effects [15]. In addition to the relative safety of buprenorphine, it is important to consider that OUD is highly comorbid with myriad mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety [16]. Prescribing psychologists are therefore well equipped to make an impact in reducing opioid overdose deaths, as they have done with mental health-related mortality [17]. As such, states with RxP laws have a unique, highly trained work-force at their disposal that is ready-made to address the surging opioid crisis. Those states should work to enact an exception to their current RxP laws for buprenorphine, and future RxP bills in the United States and internationally should include a similar exception, to allow these forgotten providers to do what they do best: save lives. Phillip M. Hughes: Conceptualization; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. Derek C. Phillips: Writing—review and editing. E. Blake Fagan: Writing—review and editing. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207