Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31993300›Full record

ReviewPreventive medicine reports2020

Strengths and weaknesses of existing data sources to support research to address the opioids crisis.

Rosanna Smart, Courtney A Kase, Erin A Taylor, Susan Lumsden, Scott R Smith, Bradley D Stein

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Preventive medicine reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Opioid Misuse and Suicide-Related Outcomes Among Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Fair allocation strategies for opioid settlements.Health care management science · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Assessment of Epidemiological Data and Surveillance in Korea Substance Use Research: Insights and Future Directions.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

6 authors.

Rosanna SmartRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States.
Courtney A KaseRAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Erin A TaylorRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States.
Susan LumsdenOffice of Health Policy, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, United States.
Scott R SmithOffice of Health Policy, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, United States.
Bradley D SteinRAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.

Funding

Optimal Methods for Estimating Policy Effect Heterogeneity in Opioid Policy ResearchP50DA046351 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI BRADLEY D STEIN · 2018 to 2026
$20.8M
Scientific and Technical CoreP2CHD041022 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Martha Jane Bailey · 2016 to 2026
$6.9M
CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR POPULATION TRAINING PROGRAMT32HD007545 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI HIRAM BELTRAN-SANCHEZ, Megan M Sweeney · 2001 to 2026
$4.1M
State Naloxone Policies: Exploring Effects of Implementation on EMS and Community Bystander UseR21DA045950 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI SMART, ROSANNA · 2018 to 2019
$474k
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD041022NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007545NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA046351NIDA NIH HHS R21 DA045950
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Better opioid prescribing practices, promoting effective opioid use disorder treatment, improving naloxone access, and enhancing public health surveillance are strategies central to reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Successfully advancing and evaluating these strategies requires leveraging and linking existing secondary data sources. We conducted a scoping study in Fall 2017 at RAND, including a literature search (updated in December 2018) complemented by semi-structured interviews with policymakers and researchers, to identify data sources and linking strategies commonly used in opioid studies, describe data source strengths and limitations, and highlight opportunities to use data to address high-priority public health research questions. We identified 306 articles, published between 2005 and 2018, that conducted secondary analyses of existing data to examine one or more public health strategies. Multiple secondary data sources, available at national, state, and local levels, support such research, with substantial breadth in data availability, data contents, and the data's ability to support multi-level analyses over time. Interviewees identified opportunities to expand existing capabilities through systematic enhancements, including greater support to states for creating and facilitating data use, as well as key data challenges, such as data availability lags and difficulties matching individual-level data over time or across datasets. Multiple secondary data sources exist that can be used to examine the impact of public health approaches to addressing the opioid crisis. Greater data access, improved usability for research purposes, and data element standardization can enhance their value, as can improved data availability timeliness and better data comparability across jurisdictions.

Indexed as

Data linkageData sourcesOpioid researchOpioidsScoping study

Identifiers

PMID31993300
PMCPMC6971390

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.