MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889051056 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.4106678.v1

Pattern of Opioid Analgesic Prescription for Adults by Dentists in Nova Scotia, Canada

2018· other· en· W6889051056 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical prescriptionOpioidNova scotiaAnalgesicPharmacyObservational studyCodeine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global consumption of prescription opioid analgesics has increased dramatically in the past 2 decades, outpacing that of illicit drugs in some countries. The increase has been partly ascribed to the widespread availability of prescription opioid analgesics and their subsequent nonmedical use, which may have contributed to the epidemic of opioid abuse, addiction, and overdose-related deaths. International studies report that dentists may be among the leading prescribers of opioid analgesics, thus adding to the societal impact of this epidemic. Between 2009 and 2011, dentists in the United States prescribed 8% to 12% of opioid analgesics dispensed. There is little information on the pattern of opioid analgesic prescription by dentists in Canada. The aim of this study was to examine the pattern of opioid analgesics prescription by dentists in Nova Scotia (NS), Canada. This retrospective observational study used the provincial prescription monitoring program’s record of oral opioid analgesics and combinations dispensed to persons 16 y and older at community pharmacies that were prescribed by dentists from January 2011 to December 2015. During the study period, more than 70% of licensed dentists in NS wrote a prescription for dispensed opioid analgesics, comprising about 17% of all opioid analgesic prescribers. However, dentists were responsible for less than 4% of all prescriptions for dispensed opioid analgesics, prescribing less than 0.5% of the total morphine milligram equivalent (MMEq) of opioid analgesics dispensed over the 5 y. There was a significant downward trend in total MMEq of dispensed opioid analgesics prescribed by dentists from about 2.23 million MMEq in 2011 to 1.93 million MMEq in 2015 (r = –0.97; P = 0.006). Opioid prescription is common among dentists, but their contribution to the overall availability of opioid analgesics is low. Furthermore, there has been a downward trend in total dispensed MMEq of opioid analgesics prescribed by dentists.Knowledge Transfer Statement: This study will serve to inform dentists and policy makers on the types and dosage of opioid analgesics being prescribed by dentists. The study may prompt dentists to reflect on and adjust their practice of opioid analgesic prescription in view of the current opioid analgesic epidemic.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataFrench-language works237,207