ArticleBMC public health2020
General practice patients starting treatment for substance use problems: observations from two data sources across levels of care.
Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Belgium, the incidence of treatment episodes for substance use problems is monitored by the Network of Sentinel General Practices (SGP), and at higher, specialist care levels by the Treatment Demand Indicator (TDI) surveillance. Using both data sources, we examine 1) how patients starting specialist treatment for substance use problems on referral by their GP compare to those that were referred by non-GP caregivers; 2) how patients starting GP treatment for substance use problems without receiving concurrent specialist treatment compare to those who did.
methodsBoth surveillances are based on the TDI protocol for reporting data to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) on individuals starting treatment as a result of their substance use. Data from 2016 and 2017 were examined using 95% confidence intervals and multivariate logistic regression.
resultsAccording to TDI-data (n = 16,543), determinants of being referred by a GP (versus by a non-GP caregiver) for specialist treatment were age ≥ median (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.13-1.38), education ≥ secondary level (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.15-1.41), recent employment (OR 1.71; 1.56-1.88), recent stable accommodation (3.62; 95% CI 3.08-4.26), first treatment episode (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.57-1.87), recent daily primary substance use (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.33-1.59) and mono substance use (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.04-1.48). Type of substance use was a significant determinant with higher odds of using pharmaceuticals (and alcohol) (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.04-1.48), and lower odds of using cannabis only/primarily (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.62-0.86), with reference to street drugs minus cannabis only/primarily. According to SGP data (n = 314), determinants of starting GP treatment without concurrent specialist treatment were recent employment (OR 2.58; 95% CI 1.36-4.91), first treatment episode (OR 2.78; 95% CI 1.39-5.55) and living in the Brussels or Walloon region (OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.06-3.66).
conclusionsThis study provides a useful insight into the general practice population treated for substance use problems. It shows that both surveillances consistently found a relatively favourable profile of general practice patients with substance use problems.
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.