MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404709948 · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000001403

Disruption of Opioid Treatment Program Services Due to an Extreme Weather Event: An Example of Climate Change Effects on the Health of Persons Who Use Drugs

2024· article· en· W4404709948 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Dunn, Paul Grekin, James Darnton, Sean Soth, Elizabeth J. Austin, Stephen Woolworth, Elenore P. Bhatraju, Alex J. Gojic, Emily C. Williams, Kevin A. Hallgren, Judith I. Tsui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Addiction Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsEssays on Canadian Writing
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsOpioid use disorderExtreme weatherClimate changeVulnerability (computing)MedicineFlooding (psychology)OpioidComputer securityPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change and the opioid epidemic in combination may pose significant challenges for individuals with opioid use disorder due to potential disruptions in access to essential addiction treatment services caused by extreme weather events. Despite concerns over the escalating health impacts of climate change, limited research has documented and explored the vulnerability of patients enrolled in opioid treatment programs to disruptions caused by climate change and particularly extreme cold events. In this commentary, we describe the impact of a catastrophic flooding event during record-setting cold temperatures at an opioid treatment program in Seattle, WA. By examining this event, we highlight the potential vulnerabilities the methadone treatment infrastructure faces regarding climate change and future extreme weather events. In doing so, we hope to draw attention to a critical need for research that describes, plans for, and addresses disruptions to opioid use disorder treatment resulting from climate change-related weather events.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Addiction MedicineSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207