Repurposing prescribed hydromorphone: Alternative uses of safer supply and tablet-injectable opioid agonist treatment to meet unaddressed health needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In response to the ongoing overdose crisis in Canada, a number of opioid agonist treatment and safer supply programs provide people at high overdose risk with daily-dispensed tablet hydromorphone, with some requiring witnessed ingestion and others providing take-away doses. While these programs are intended to reduce overdose events by limiting people's use of the contaminated drug supply, the experiences of people receiving hydromorphone vary. In this article we explore the ways people repurpose hydromorphone to address unmet needs. METHODS: This article draws on in-depth qualitative interviews from two studies evaluating hydromorphone tablet distribution programs in British Columbia, Canada. We used thematic analysis to identify themes related to repurposing hydromorphone. We compared themes across the two studies to identify any similarities or differences in relation to the ways study participants discussed repurposing hydromorphone tablets. We utilize vignettes - snapshots of participant experiences - to analyse and represent the data. RESULTS: Four vignettes demonstrate how hydromorphone tablets are often being used to address and resolve unmet needs of people who use drugs. While most participants reported reducing their use of illicit drugs, a variety of instrumental uses of tablet hydromorphone were also discussed, including reducing anxiety, addressing sleep issues, withdrawal management, and managing chronic pain. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate how people who use drugs are maximizing the benefits of tablet hydromorphone distribution to address unmet needs. Hydromorphone distribution programs represent a public health and harm reduction intervention that is usefully addressing experiences related to structural vulnerabilities (such as inadequate pain management), which are often overlooked amongst stigmatized groups.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".