MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406917663 · doi:10.1111/add.16760

Association between prescribed stimulant medications and overdose among individuals receiving opioid agonist therapy: A retrospective cohort study from British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· en· W4406917663 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Samantha Young, Nadia Fairbairn, Zishan Cui, Paxton Bach, Wing Yin Mok, Juls Budau, Amanda Slaunwhite, Lianping Ti, Kanna Hayashi, Seonaid Nolan

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's HospitalBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCNational Institute on Drug AbuseSt. Paul's Foundation
KeywordsMedicineStimulantBuprenorphineDrug overdoseRetrospective cohort studyCohortOpioid use disorderHazard ratio(+)-NaloxoneOpioidCohort studyMethadoneConfoundingInternal medicineAnesthesiaPoison controlConfidence intervalEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: We measured the association between prescribed stimulant medications and overdose among individuals receiving opioid agonist therapy (OAT) for opioid use disorder. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the British Columbia Provincial Overdose Cohort, a linked administrative database. SETTING: We used data from British Columbia, Canada, from January 2015 through February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 9395 individuals contributed 18 273 person-years of follow-up while dispensed OAT. MEASUREMENTS: We examined the association between stimulant prescription (primary exposure) and fatal or non-fatal overdose (primary outcome, allowing for recurrent events) after adjusting for potential confounders including sociodemographic characteristics and substance use patterns. As a secondary analysis, we evaluated type of OAT (full agonists involving methadone or slow-release oral morphine versus partial agonist involving buprenorphine/naloxone alone) as a potential effect modifier. FINDINGS: There were 1746 overdose events; 37 (2.1%) were fatal. Overall, there was no increased risk of overdose among individuals dispensed a stimulant medication while on OAT [adjusted Cox regression hazard ratio (AHR) = 1.13, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.86-1.49, P = 0.39]. When analyzed by type of OAT medication, for individuals on buprenorphine, dispensation of a stimulant medication was associated with a reduced risk of overdose (AHR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.23-0.96, P = 0.037) while, for individuals on full agonist OAT, dispensation of a stimulant medication was associated with an increased risk of overdose (AHR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.09-2.07, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: There does not appear to be an overall increased risk of overdose for individuals co-prescribed a stimulant medication with opioid agonist therapy (OAT). There appears to be a reduced risk of overdose for individuals dispensed buprenorphine with a stimulant medication compared with those dispensed buprenorphine alone, and an increased risk of overdose for individuals dispensed full agonist OAT (methadone or slow-release oral morphine) with a stimulant medication compared with those dispensed full agonist OAT alone.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207