MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387971775 · doi:10.56367/oag-040-10665

The role of prescribing practices in managing chronic pain with opioids

2023· article· en· W4387971775 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Government · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic painPharmacotherapyOxycodoneAcupunctureOpioidModalitiesIntensive care medicineSedationAnesthesiaPhysical therapyAlternative medicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of prescribing practices in managing chronic pain with opioids Norm Buckley and Jason Busse from the Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Pain Research and Care discuss prescribing practices, managing chronic pain with opioids, and the contribution of licit and illicit opioids towards the Canadian opioid crisis. Over the past 40 years, chronic pain treatment has ranged from pharmacotherapy, regional anesthesia techniques, graduated exercise, physiotherapy modalities, lifestyle modification, psychotherapy (e.g., cognitive behavioral therapy), and complementary therapies such as acupuncture, yoga, and Tai Chi. Pharmacotherapy included the use of anticonvulsant drugs such as carbamazepine with their risks of liver dysfunction, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories with the risk of bleeding and renal injury, anti-depressants with serotonin, cholinergic and adrenergic actions, and complications including sedation and cardiac arrhythmia, and opioids.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.325 · 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