Peer Intervention to Link Overdose Survivors to Treatment (PILOT): Protocol for a Multisite, Randomized Controlled Trial Conducted Within the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increase in opioid-related overdoses has caused a decrease in average life expectancy, highlighting the need for effective interventions to reduce overdose risk and prevent subsequent overdoses. Peer support specialists (PSSs) offer an appealing strategy to engage overdose survivors and reduce overdose risk, but randomized controlled trials are needed to formalize peer-led interventions and evaluate their effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: This National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study is a multisite, prospective, pilot randomized (1:1) controlled trial (CTN protocol 0107) that aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an emergency department (ED)-initiated, peer-delivered intervention tailored for opioid overdose survivors (Peer Intervention to Link Overdose survivors to Treatment [PILOT]), compared with treatment as usual (TAU). METHODS: This study evaluates the effectiveness of the 6-month, PSS-led PILOT intervention compared with TAU on the primary outcome of reducing overdose risk behavior 6 months after enrollment. Adults (aged ≥18 years; N=150) with a recent opioid-related overdose were identified and approached in the ED. Participants were screened and enrolled, either in the ED or within 7 days of ED discharge at research offices or in the community and then asked to complete study visits at months 1, 3, 6 (end of intervention), and 7 (follow-up). Participants were enrolled at 3 study sites in the United States: Greenville, South Carolina; Youngstown, Ohio; and Everett, Washington. Participants randomized to the PILOT intervention received a 6-month, PSS-led intervention tailored to each participant's goals to reduce their overdose risk behavior (eg, overdose harm reduction, housing, medical, and substance use treatment or recovery goals). Participants randomized to TAU received standard-of-care overdose materials, education, and services provided through the participating EDs. This paper describes the study protocol and procedures, explains the design and inclusion and exclusion decisions, and provides details of the peer-led PILOT intervention and supervision of PILOT PSSs. RESULTS: Study enrollment opened in December 2021 and was closed in July 2023. A total of 150 participants across 3 sites were enrolled in the study, meeting the proposed sample size for the trial. Primary and secondary analyses are underway and expected to be published in early 2025. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to better understand the characteristics of overdose survivors presenting to the ED and for rigorous trials evaluating the effectiveness of PSS-led interventions on engaging overdose survivors and reducing overdose risk. Results from this pilot randomized controlled trial will provide a description of the characteristics of overdose survivors presenting to the ED; outline the implementation of PSS services research in ED settings, including PSS implementation of PSS supervision and activity tracking; and inform ED-initiated PSS-led overdose risk reduction interventions and future research to better understand the implementation and efficacy of these interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05123027; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05123027. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/60277.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.049 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.015 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".