MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417295078 · doi:10.1186/s13722-025-00636-0

Perspectives of people who use drugs on implementing overdose response technologies in acute care settings: a qualitative study

2025· article· en· W4417295078 on OpenAlex
Avnit Dhanoa, Dylan Viste, William Rioux, Boogyung Seo, María Fernanda Vásquez, Stephanie VandenBerg, Chris Anhorn, S. Monty Ghosh

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction Science & Clinical Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisHealth careAcute careAddiction treatmentQualitative researchAddictionHarm reductionData collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs (PWUD) face many barriers in healthcare settings. Illicit substance use during hospital stays, including solitary use in bathrooms, is prevalent, leading to a higher risk of overdoses. In this study, we examine the views of PWUD on implementing novel strategies such as overdose response technologies (ORTs) into acute care and explore the perceived acceptability, impacts, and barriers of these interventions. METHODS: We used convenience sampling to recruit 10 participants from hospitals and addiction medicine clinics, and semi-structured interviews were conducted. The interviews included an explanation of the five main types of ORTs relevant to acute care settings (hotlines, applications, overdose buttons, reverse motion detectors, and wearables), followed by questions where the participant had to critically evaluate whether each ORTs would be effective for each scenario. Open-ended coding and thematic analysis were used, and themes were derived from the data as it was reviewed. RESULTS: Participants acknowledged the advantages and potential risks of integrating ORTs into acute care. It was recognized that ORTs could help improve the relationships between PWUD and healthcare providers, reduce mortality rates in hospital bathrooms, and provide peer support during hospital stays. PWUD highlighted privacy concerns, logistical barriers, and stated that ORTs can also negatively impact their relationships with healthcare providers due to stigma. CONCLUSION: Although many participants felt that incorporating ORTs would be an advantage to their care within hospitals, our study also highlighted implementation barriers and broader policy changes that need to be addressed. Working towards addressing such barriers and changes can allow ORTs to be the next tool to help mitigate barriers faced by PWUD.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.460 · 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