MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404889388 · doi:10.1177/29767342241298044

Comparative Effectiveness of Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Methadone on Methamphetamine/Amphetamine Use Among People with Opioid Use Disorder in Canada

2024· article· en· W4404889388 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jenna Langlois, Nadia Fairbairn, Didier Jutras-Aswad, Bernard Le Foll, Keith Ahamad, Ron Lim, M. Eugenia Socías

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use &amp Addiction Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsWaypoint Centre for Mental Health CareUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversité de MontréalBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseUniversity of CalgaryCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacs
KeywordsBuprenorphineMethadoneMethamphetamineAmphetamine(+)-NaloxoneOpioid use disorderPsychiatryMedicineOpioidPsychologyInternal medicineDopamine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: It has been suggested that opioid agonist therapy (OAT) may have a secondary benefit of reducing methamphetamine/amphetamine use. However, current evidence is limited and conflicting, and little is known on the impacts of different OATs on methamphetamine/amphetamine use. The aim of this study was to examine the comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone on methamphetamine/amphetamine use among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) initiating OAT in Canada. Methods: Data for this study were derived from a 24-week pan-Canadian pragmatic trial conducted between 2017 and 2020 comparing supervised methadone versus flexible take-home dosing buprenorphine/naloxone models of care among OUD. Generalized linear mixed models were used to evaluate the independent effect of treatment (ie, methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone) and time in treatment (ie, week 2 through 24, continuous) on methamphetamine/amphetamine use (measured by urine drug test and self-report using Timeline Follow-Back). Results: The sample included 210 participants that initiated OAT, of which 130 (61.9%) were using methamphetamine/amphetamine at baseline. In multivariable analysis, neither treatment nor time in treatment were significantly associated with the odds of methamphetamine/amphetamine use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.34-1.08, P = .092; and AOR = 0.73, CI = 0.40-1.28, P = .283, respectively). No interaction between treatment and time in treatment was observed for methamphetamine/amphetamine use ( P = .367). Conclusion: Methamphetamine/amphetamine use was common among this sample of people with OUD initiating OAT in Canada. Over the 24-week study period, buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone were not associated with a quantifiable change in methamphetamine/amphetamine use among this sample population. The observation of less methamphetamine/amphetamine use in the buprenorphine/naloxone arm warrants further research.

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)0.009
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Use &amp Addiction JournalSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207