MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404809216 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.5934

Reframing conceptualizations of opioid use disorder treatment in primary care

2024· article· en· W4404809216 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kellia Chiu, Abhimanyu Sud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth, Drugs, and Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingPrimary careOpioid use disorderOpioidPsychotherapistPsychologyPsychiatryMedicineInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>CONTEXT:</h3> Opioid use disorder (OUD) and drug-related harms are health priorities requiring urgent policy responses. In countries like Canada and Australia, which have been experiencing high rates of opioid-related harms, there have been many calls to increase involvement of and improve OUD care in primary care. <h3>OBJECTIVE:</h3> To understand the factors that influence how OUD treatment is delivered through primary care in Canada and Australia and to identify current barriers and opportunities to improve OUD care in primary care. <h3>STUDY DESIGN &amp; ANALYSIS:</h3> In our qualitative policy analysis, we used Starfield’s 4Cs conceptualization of primary care functions (first contact, comprehensiveness, continuity, coordination) to examine how and why current primary care systems may be suited towards, or pose challenges to providing OUD care, and to identify health system opportunities to address these challenges. <h3>SETTING/DATASET:</h3> We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with 16 key informants with insights into opioid use policy in Canada and Australia. These included people with lived/living experience of drug use, clinicians, researchers, government health department staff, and individuals from non-government organizations focusing on drug use. <h3>RESULTS:</h3> Primary care was identified to be an ideal setting for OUD care due to its potential as the first point of contact in the health system; the opportunity to offer other health and social services to people with OUD; and the ability to coordinate with other care providers (e.g. specialists, social workers), thus providing care continuity. However, challenges include the prevailing model of OUD treatment, where addictions care is not viewed as part of comprehensive primary care, and the lack of resources and support for broader chronic disease management in primary care. Additionally, the highly regulated OUD policy landscape has manifested as a ‘regulatory cascade’ in which restrictive oversight of OUD treatment passes from regulators to health providers to people receiving treatment, normalizing the overly restrictive nature and inaccessibility of OUD care. <h3>CONCLUSIONS:</h3> The regulatory and sociocultural context of opioid use has led to treatment models involving primary care with priorities that conflict with the priorities and wellbeing of many people with OUD. This work presents an opportunity to re-think primary care delivery (including and beyond OUD care) from the perspective of people living at the margins.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicYouth, Drugs, and ViolenceFrench-language works237,207