Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28223866›Full record

ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2017

Cross-national analysis of estimated narcotic utilization for twelve Arabic speaking countries in the Middle East.

Kyle John Wilby, Kerry Wilbur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kyle John WilbyPO Box 2713, College of Pharmacy, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.
Kerry WilburPO Box 2713, College of Pharmacy, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to narcotics has been described as suboptimal in the Middle East. The objectives of this study were to characterize estimated narcotic use in twelve Arabic-speaking nations and compare across world regions.

methodsThis was a population-based cross-sectional analysis of estimated average consumption of narcotic drugs in defined daily doses per million inhabitants, as provided by the International Narcotics Control Board Technical Reports (2008-2012). Five years of data (2008-2012) were extracted from reports for 12 Arabic-speaking countries: Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt, and Yemen. Data were also obtained for world regions.

resultsIn 2012, Bahrain and Kuwait had the highest estimates (364 and 352 defined daily doses per million inhabitants per day, respectively), while Yemen and Iraq had the lowest (9 and 6 defined daily doses per million inhabitants per day, respectively). North America, Oceania, and Europe had the highest rates (32,264, 9978, and 7937 defined daily doses per million inhabitants per day, respectively), while Arabic-Countries were only ahead of Africa and Central America (128, 91, 87 defined daily doses per million inhabitants per day, respectively).

conclusionsGreat variability was observed in estimates between 12 Arabic countries and even larger disparity when Arabic-Countries were benchmarked against world regions, suggesting a need for future studies to determine reasons for these discrepancies.

Indexed as

CancerEpidemiologyMiddle EastNarcoticOpioid

Identifiers

PMID28223866
PMCPMC5310135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.