MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4376958943 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068310

Cohort profile: POPPY II – a population-based cohort examining the patterns and outcomes of prescription opioid use in New South Wales, Australia

2023· article· en· W4376958943 on OpenAlexafffund
Natasa Gisev, Sallie‐Anne Pearson, Timothy Dobbins, Luke Buizen, Thomas J. Murphy, Andrew Wilson, Fiona Blyth, Adrian Dunlop, Sarah Larney, David C. Currow, Richard P. Mattick, Louisa Degenhardt

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Drug and Alcohol Research CentreNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNSW Ministry of HealthAustralian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australian GovernmentMedical Research CouncilFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéAustralian Government
KeywordsMedicineCohortOxycodoneCodeineOpioidMedical prescriptionPharmacyPopulationCohort studyFamily medicineInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPharmacologyMorphine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The POPPY II cohort is an Australian state-based cohort linking data for a population of individuals prescribed opioid medicines, constructed to allow a robust examination of the long-term patterns and outcomes of prescription opioid use. PARTICIPANTS: The cohort includes 3 569 433 adult New South Wales residents who initiated a subsidised prescription opioid medicine between 2003 and 2018, identified through pharmacy dispensing data (Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) and linked to 10 national and state datasets and registries including rich sociodemographic and medical services data. FINDINGS TO DATE: Of the 3.57 million individuals included in the cohort, 52.7% were female and 1 in 4 people were aged ≥65 years at the time of cohort entry. Approximately 6% had evidence of cancer in the year prior to cohort entry. In the 3 months prior to cohort entry, 26.9% used a non-opioid analgesic and 20.5% used a psychotropic medicine. Overall, 1 in 5 individuals were initiated on a strong opioid (20.9%). The most commonly initiated opioid was paracetamol/codeine (61.3%), followed by oxycodone (16.3%). FUTURE PLANS: The POPPY II cohort will be updated periodically, both extending the follow-up duration of the existing cohort, and including new individuals initiating opioids. The POPPY II cohort will allow a range of aspects of opioid utilisation to be studied, including long-term trajectories of opioid use, development of a data-informed method to assess time-varying opioid exposure, and a range of outcomes including mortality, transition to opioid dependence, suicide and falls. The duration of the study period will allow examination of population-level impacts of changes to opioid monitoring and access, while the size of the cohort will also allow examination of important subpopulations such as people with cancer, musculoskeletal conditions or opioid use disorder.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment→French-language works237,207→