Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28719885›Full record

ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2017

Racial and ethnic differences in opioid agonist treatment for opioid use disorder in a U.S. national sample.

Noa Krawczyk, Kenneth A Feder, Michael I Fingerhood, Brendan Saloner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Noa KrawczykJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Mental Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States. Electronic address: noa.krawczyk@jhu.edu.
Kenneth A FederJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Mental Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States.
Michael I FingerhoodJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Mental Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 733 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States.
Brendan SalonerJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Mental Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States.

Funding

NIDA Epidemiology Training Program: Johns Hopkins UniversityT32DA007292 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI RENEE M. JOHNSON, Brion S Maher · 1993 to 2026
$17.7M
POSTDOCTORAL TRAINING PROGRAM IN SAS PREVENTIONT32DA007293 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI MERMELSTEIN, ROBIN J. · 1993 to 2008
$2.4M
NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007292NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007293
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOpioid Agonist Treatment (OAT) is the standard of care for the treatment of opioid use disorders. However, most people in treatment do not receive OAT. This study evaluated whether there are racial and/or ethnic differences in OAT receipt among adults entering specialty treatment for opioid use disorders in publicly-funded treatment programs across the U.S.

methodsUsing data from the national Treatment: Episode Data Base, odds of OAT receipt were compared among black, Hispanic and white clients. Mediation analyses were used to explore whether any racial/ethnic differences in OAT receipt were explained by variation in clinical need or by other treatment, sociodemographic, or geographic characteristics. Interaction terms were used to assess whether this association was modified by primary opioid type.

resultsOnly 28.7% of clients received OAT. Odds of OAT receipt were significantly higher odds among blacks (OR: 2.27(2.14-2.41)) and Hispanics (OR: 1.98(1.88-2.09)), compared to whites. Differences in clinical need accounted for a substantial portion of this difference (76.79% and 49.74%, respectively). Differences persisted after accounting for other potential explanatory variables (adjusted OR: 1.37 (1.24-1.52); 1.21(1.11-1.32)), but were only evident for primary heroin users (adjusted OR: 1.50 (1.34-1.69); 1.29 (1.17-1.42)) and not other opioid users.

conclusionsOAT receipt in treatment programs is low overall and particularly lacking among white heroin users. Differences in OAT receipt cannot be fully explained by differences in clinical need. More research is needed to understand and address barriers that underpin these differences so more patients with opioid use disorder can access evidenced-based treatment.

Indexed as

Opioid-Related DisordersAdultBlack or African AmericanHispanic or LatinoHumansUnited StatesWhite PeopleEthnic minoritiesMedication assisted treatmentOpioid agonist treatmentOpioid treatment programsOpioid use disorderRacial disparities

Identifiers

PMID28719885
PMCPMC5557040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.