MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7092201470 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/d7kfz

Telehealth-Delivered Medication-Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Outcomes

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2025
Typeother
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematic reviewTelehealthOpioid use disorderMEDLINEOpioid overdosePopulationCochrane LibraryPsychological interventionOdds

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose and Background The opioid crisis continues to pose one of the most urgent public health challenges in North America and globally. While Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT)—which combines FDA-approved medications such as buprenorphine, methadone, or naltrexone with counseling and behavioral therapies—has proven effective in reducing opioid use and overdose, barriers such as stigma, provider shortages, and limited access persist, particularly in rural and underserved areas. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telehealth-delivered MAT, offering new possibilities for expanding equitable access to care. However, the evidence base remains fragmented. The purpose of this project is to synthesize existing research evaluating the efficacy, utilization, and patient outcomes of telehealth-delivered MAT compared with traditional in-person treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to: Quantitatively assess treatment retention, overdose reduction, and other patient outcomes in telehealth-delivered MAT. Identify population and program factors influencing intervention effectiveness. Explore research and policy gaps, particularly those related to digital health equity, broadband access, and regulatory barriers to telehealth implementation. Methods Overview This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Databases searched: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Search timeframe: Inception to April 2024. Inclusion criteria: Studies reporting quantitative or mixed-methods data on telehealth-delivered MAT for OUD. Data management tools: EndNote (for deduplication) and Rayyan (for screening). Risk of bias tools: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), AXIS, CASP, and TIDieR as appropriate. Meta-analysis model: Random-effects (DerSimonian–Laird) using log odds ratios and standardized mean differences. Registration: This protocol is preregistered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) to ensure transparency and reproducibility. Expected Outcomes The project is expected to: Provide pooled quantitative evidence on retention and overdose outcomes associated with telehealth MAT. Identify consistent patterns across populations, settings, and telehealth modalities. Offer clear policy recommendations supporting permanent telehealth prescribing flexibilities and integration into addiction care. Highlight key evidence gaps—such as lack of data from low- and middle-income countries, or inequities related to broadband access, digital literacy, and stigma. Impact and Knowledge Mobilization Findings will inform clinical practice, public health policy, and telehealth expansion strategies in addiction medicine. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and knowledge-mobilization partnerships with Canadian and U.S. healthcare institutions. In alignment with WHO and CDC telehealth frameworks, this project supports evidence-based digital health transformation to improve equitable access to OUD treatment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.337 · 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