MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Prevalence of fentanyl exposure and knowledge regarding the risk of its use among emergency department patients with active opioid use history at an urban medical center in Baltimore, Maryland

2019· article· en· W6939769605 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFentanylHeroinOpioid overdoseEmergency departmentPolysubstance dependenceOpioidDrug overdose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Overdose deaths from fentanyl and its analogs have increased significantly since 2013. There are limited data regarding the prevalence of fentanyl exposure among emergency department (ED) patients with active opioid use. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study at an urban hospital from May 20 to July 30, 2018. A convenience sample of adult ED patients with active opioid use, defined as opioid use within seven days prior to ED visit, were enrolled. Rapid Response® Single Drug Test Strip (BTNX Inc., Markham, Canada) was used to detect fentanyl in urine samples. Information on demographic, substance use history, and knowledge of fentanyl was obtained using a brief survey tool. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of fentanyl exposure; secondary outcomes included patients’ knowledge regarding potency, risk of overdose death from fentanyl and intentional purchase of fentanyl. Results: During our study period, 451 patients reported active substance use. Of these, 208 reported active opioid use and 165 consented for the study. The median age was 49 years [interquartile range: 38, 57] and 77.0% (n = 127) were male; 42 participants (25.5%) presented to ED after an acute overdose event. Heroin was the preferred opioid of use in 90.8% of the participants, primarily via intranasal route (64.6%). Polysubstance use was reported in 98.8%, most commonly with cocaine (57.6%; n = 95). Fentanyl was detected in 104 out of 129 urine samples tested (80.6%). 84.2% (n = 139) identified fentanyl as highly potent and 85.5% (n = 141) recognized highest risk of death in fentanyl overdose. A larger proportion of non-overdose participants intentionally purchased fentanyl (34.1%; n = 42) compared to the overdose group (16.7%, n = 7; p = .04). Conclusions: The majority of ED patient with active opiate use were exposed to fentanyl while one in three participants intentionally purchased fentanyl despite their awareness of its potency and the high-risk of death from overdose.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment→French-language works237,207→