ArticlePloS one2019
Co-prescription network reveals social dynamics of opioid doctor shopping.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Social network analysis for medical narcotics in South Korea: focusing on patients and healthcare organizations.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Network analysis of U.S. non-fatal opioid-involved overdose journeys, 2018-2023.Applied network science · 2024Article
- Article
- Analytic Advances in Social Networks and Health in the Twenty-First Century.Journal of health and social behavior · 2022Review
- New means, new measures: assessing prescription drug-seeking indicators over 10 years of the opioid epidemic.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2022Article
- Comparing measures of centrality in bipartite patient-prescriber networks: A study of drug seeking for opioid analgesics.PloS one · 2022Article
- Associations between mobility patterns and COVID-19 deaths during the pandemic: A network structure and rank propagation modelling approach.Array (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- "Doctor and pharmacy shopping": A fading signal for prescription opioid use monitoring?Drug and alcohol dependence · 2021Article
- Systematic Evaluation of State Policy Interventions Targeting the US Opioid Epidemic, 2007-2018.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Health Information Technology and Doctor Shopping: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This paper examines network prominence in a co-prescription network as an indicator of opioid doctor shopping (i.e., fraudulent solicitation of opioids from multiple prescribers). Using longitudinal data from a large commercially insured population, we construct a network where a tie between patients is weighted by the number of shared opioid prescribers. Given prior research suggesting that doctor shopping may be a social process, we hypothesize that active doctor shoppers will occupy central structural positions in this network. We show that network prominence, operationalized using PageRank, is associated with more opioid prescriptions, higher predicted risk for dangerous morphine dosage, opioid overdose, and opioid use disorder, controlling for number of prescribers and other variables. Moreover, as a patient's prominence increases over time, so does their risk for these outcomes, compared to their own average level of risk. Results highlight the importance of co-prescription networks in characterizing high-risk social dynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.