MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390701513 · doi:10.1111/add.16434

Response to Hall <i>et al</i>.: Prescription psychostimulants for amphetamine‐type stimulant use disorder ‐ acknowledging challenges but not giving up on its potential cost‐effectiveness

2024· letter· en· W4390701513 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Heidar Sharafi, Didier Jutras‐Aswad

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsConceptualizationMedical prescriptionStimulantPsychologyLibrary scienceMedicinePsychiatryNursingPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AddictionEarly View LETTER TO THE EDITOR Response to Hall et al.: Prescription psychostimulants for amphetamine-type stimulant use disorder - acknowledging challenges but not giving up on its potential cost-effectiveness Heidar Sharafi, Heidar Sharafi orcid.org/0000-0001-9177-9117 Research Centre, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Quebec, Canada Department of Psychiatry and Addictology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada Contribution: Conceptualization (equal), Writing - original draft (equal), Writing - review & editing (equal)Search for more papers by this authorDidier Jutras-Aswad, Corresponding Author Didier Jutras-Aswad [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-8474-508X Research Centre, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Quebec, Canada Department of Psychiatry and Addictology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada Correspondence Didier Jutras-Aswad, CHUM Research Centre, 900 St-Denis, Viger Tower, Room R05.746, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 1P1. Email: [email protected] Contribution: Conceptualization (equal), Writing - original draft (equal), Writing - review & editing (equal)Search for more papers by this author Heidar Sharafi, Heidar Sharafi orcid.org/0000-0001-9177-9117 Research Centre, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Quebec, Canada Department of Psychiatry and Addictology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada Contribution: Conceptualization (equal), Writing - original draft (equal), Writing - review & editing (equal)Search for more papers by this authorDidier Jutras-Aswad, Corresponding Author Didier Jutras-Aswad [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-8474-508X Research Centre, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Quebec, Canada Department of Psychiatry and Addictology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada Correspondence Didier Jutras-Aswad, CHUM Research Centre, 900 St-Denis, Viger Tower, Room R05.746, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 1P1. Email: [email protected] Contribution: Conceptualization (equal), Writing - original draft (equal), Writing - review & editing (equal)Search for more papers by this author First published: 10 January 2024 https://doi.org/10.1111/add.16434Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. REFERENCES 1Hall W, Darke S, Farrell M. Do we need clinical trials of high dose stimulant agonist treatment for stimulant use disorders? Addiction. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.16416 10.1111/add.16416 PubMedGoogle Scholar 2Sharafi H, Bakouni H, McAnulty C, Drouin S, Coronado-Montoya S, Bahremand A, et al. Prescription psychostimulants for the treatment of amphetamine-type stimulant use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Addiction. 2024. PMID: Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/add.16347 10.1111/add.16347 Web of Science®Google Scholar 3Konstenius M, Jayaram-Lindstrom N, Guterstam J, Beck O, Philips B, Franck J. Methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and drug relapse in criminal offenders with substance dependence: a 24-week randomized placebo-controlled trial. Addiction. 2014; 109: 440–449. 10.1111/add.12369 PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 4Nadine E, Adrian D, Michelle H, Robert A, Rebecca M, Raimondo B, et al. LiMA: a study protocol for a randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled trial of lisdexamfetamine for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence. BMJ Open. 2018; 8:e020723. PubMedGoogle Scholar Early ViewOnline Version of Record before inclusion in an issue ReferencesRelatedInformation

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0330.036
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.009

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207