MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393994460 · doi:10.2196/49527

Estimated Number of Injection-Involved Overdose Deaths in US States From 2000 to 2020: Secondary Analysis of Surveillance Data

2024· article· en· W4393994460 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eric Hall, Patrick S. Sullivan, Heather Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEmory University
KeywordsMedicineDrug overdoseHeroinDemographyMethadoneMethadone maintenanceEmergency medicineSubstance abuseMedical examinerOpioid overdosePoison controlInjury preventionEnvironmental healthDrugPsychiatryOpioidInternal medicine(+)-Naloxone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the United States, both drug overdose mortality and injection-involved drug overdose mortality have increased nationally over the past 25 years. Despite documented geographic differences in overdose mortality and substances implicated in overdose mortality trends, injection-involved overdose mortality has not been summarized at a subnational level. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to estimate the annual number of injection-involved overdose deaths in each US state from 2000 to 2020. METHODS: We conducted a stratified analysis that used data from drug treatment admissions (Treatment Episodes Data Set-Admissions; TEDS-A) and the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) to estimate state-specific percentages of reported drug overdose deaths that were injection-involved from 2000 to 2020. TEDS-A collects data on the route of administration and the type of substance used upon treatment admission. We used these data to calculate the percentage of reported injections for each drug type by demographic group (race or ethnicity, sex, and age group), year, and state. Additionally, using NVSS mortality data, the annual number of overdose deaths involving selected drug types was identified by the following specific multiple-cause-of-death codes: heroin or synthetic opioids other than methadone (T40.1, T40.4), natural or semisynthetic opioids and methadone (T40.2, T40.3), cocaine (T40.5), psychostimulants with abuse potential (T43.6), sedatives (T42.3, T42.4), and others (T36-T59.0). We used the probabilities of injection with the annual number of overdose deaths, by year, primary substance, and demographic groups to estimate the number of overdose deaths that were injection-involved. RESULTS: In 2020, there were 91,071 overdose deaths among adults recorded in the United States, and 93.1% (84,753/91,071) occurred in the 46 jurisdictions that reported data to TEDS-A. Slightly less than half (38,253/84,753, 45.1%; 95% CI 41.1%-49.8%) of those overdose deaths were estimated to be injection-involved, translating to 38,253 (95% CI 34,839-42,181) injection-involved overdose deaths in 2020. There was large variation among states in the estimated injection-involved overdose death rate (median 14.72, range 5.45-31.77 per 100,000 people). The national injection-involved overdose death rate increased by 323% (95% CI 255%-391%) from 2010 (3.78, 95% CI 3.33-4.31) to 2020 (15.97, 95% CI 14.55-17.61). States in which the estimated injection-involved overdose death rate increased faster than the national average were disproportionately concentrated in the Northeast region. CONCLUSIONS: Although overdose mortality and injection-involved overdose mortality have increased dramatically across the country, these trends have been more pronounced in some regions. A better understanding of state-level trends in injection-involved mortality can inform the prioritization of public health strategies that aim to reduce overdose mortality and prevent downstream consequences of injection drug use.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment→French-language works237,207→