MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117587384 · doi:10.1097/cxa.0000000000000258

Prevalence of Methamphetamine/Amphetamine Usage and Demographics of Users in Ontario Based on Laboratory Drug Screen Results

2025· article· en· W7117587384 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Michael Silverman, Priya Thandrasisla, Melody Lam, C. FORCHUK, Abraham Rudnick, Ken Lee, Sharon Koivu, Rohit J. Lodhi, Emily Guarasci, Jonathan Serrato, Michael Knauer, Kelly K. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Addiction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityLawson Health Research InstituteLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedical prescriptionDescriptive statisticsDemographicsPopulationHealth careEmergency departmentTest (biology)Primary care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of methamphetamine/amphetamine use in Ontario based on laboratory drug screening results, and to describe the socio-demographic characteristics of methamphetamine/amphetamine users. Methods: A cross-sectional study of persons tested with urine drug screens (UDS) for methamphetamine/amphetamine from an electronic database of laboratory test results from selected community and hospital-based laboratories across Ontario during 2017–2018. Persons who filled a prescription for stimulants within 120 days before testing were excluded. We used descriptive statistics to summarize the characteristics of those who tested positive for methamphetamine/amphetamine use, relative to those who tested negative. Results: A total of 215,529 persons were tested for methamphetamine/amphetamine, with 26,392 (12.2% of those tested) and 0.17% of the population within the catchment area, testing presumptive positive. Of those who tested positive; most were between the ages of 20 and 40 years, but 19.5% were over 50 years of age; 41.1% were women, 40.5% were in the lowest income quintile; and 27.0% and 29.2% also tested positive for opioids and cocaine, respectively. Within the 2 years before their first UDS, those testing positive had markedly higher mean frequencies of primary care visits 46.5 (SD=54.2), emergency department visits 5.0 (SD=11.0), and hospitalizations 0.8 (SD=2.1). Conclusions: Methamphetamine/amphetamine use is associated with poverty and a large burden on the health care system. Use among women and in those over 50 years of age may have been underestimated in previous studies, and concurrent opioid and cocaine use is common. Drug testing results can inform the assessment of the population demographics of drug use. Objectifs: Estimer la prévalence de la consommation de méthamphétamine/amphétamine en Ontario à partir des résultats des dépistages de drogues en laboratoire, et décrire les caractéristiques sociodémographiques des consommateurs de méthamphétamine/amphétamine. Méthodes: Une étude transversale portant sur des personnes ayant subi un dépistage urinaire (DU) de méthamphétamine/amphétamine à partir d’une base de données électronique contenant les résultats d’analyses effectuées par les laboratoires communautaires et hospitaliers de l’Ontario sélectionnés en 2017-2018. Les personnes ayant obtenu une ordonnance pour des stimulants dans les 120 jours précédant le test ont été exclues. Nous avons utilisé des statistiques descriptives pour résumer les caractéristiques des personnes dont le test de dépistage de la méthamphétamine/amphétamine était positif, par rapport à celles dont le test était négatif. Résultats: 215 529 personnes ont été testées pour la méthamphétamine/amphétamine, dont 26 392 (12,2% des personnes testées) et 0,17% de la population dans la zone desservie ont obtenu un résultat présumé positif. Parmi les personnes dont le test était positif, la plupart étaient âgées de 20 à 40 ans, mais 19,5% avaient plus de 50 ans ; 41,1% étaient des femmes, 40,5% appartenaient au quintile de revenu le plus bas ; et 27,0% et 29,2% ont également été testées positives aux opioïdes et à la cocaïne, respectivement. Au cours des deux années précédant leur premier test DU, les personnes testées positives avaient des fréquences moyennes nettement plus élevées de consultations en soins primaires (46,5, écart-type = 54,2), de visites aux urgences (5,0, écart-type = 11,0) et d’hospitalisations (0,8, écart-type = 2,1). Conclusions: La consommation de méthamphétamine/amphétamine est associée à la pauvreté et représente une charge importante pour le système de santé. La consommation chez les femmes et les personnes âgées de plus de 50 ans a peut-être été sous-estimée dans les études précédentes, et la consommation concomitante d’opioïdes et de cocaïne est courante. Les résultats des tests de dépistage de drogues peuvent étayer l'évaluation des données démographiques de la population en matière de consommation de drogues.

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)0.001
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 score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of AddictionSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207