MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406047858 · doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003040

Effect of providing at-home opioid disposal kits at discharge after an orthopaedic surgery

2025· article· en· W4406047858 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eric Z. Shan, Ruiying Xiong, Michael Katzman, Zarina S. Ali, Daniel Lee, M. Kit Delgado, Anish K. Agarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Quality · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Translational Medicine and TherapeuticsU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationHamilton Health Sciences FoundationUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsMedicineDispose patternMedical prescriptionOrthopedic surgeryOpioidEmergency medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryWaste managementInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prescription opioids after surgery may pose a risk if left unused. However, prescribers rely on their best judgement in determining how much their patients need, often resulting in over-prescription of these medications. Opioid disposal is a strategy to reduce the risk of persistent use or misuse of opioids. At-home disposal kits allow patients to safely dispose of leftover opioids. In this study, we assess the impact of opioid disposal kits on disposal rates after orthopedic surgery. In a difference-in-differences study of 1,321 eligible patients, disposal kits were associated with a 10.6 percentage point increase (95% CI: -3.5% to 24.7%) in disposal rates as well as a 10.5 percentage point increase (95% CI: 0.2% to 20.9%) in the fraction of opioids disposed. We build on prior research and identify that providing surgery patients with an opioid disposal kit at the time of discharge increases their self-disposal rates.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.375 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open QualitySame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207