ReviewPharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2022
Evaluating opioid analgesic prescribing limits: A narrative review.
Review in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- International Policy Approaches for Higher THC Cannabis Products: Are They Applicable to the Australian Medicinal Cannabis Framework?Drug and alcohol review · 2026Review
- Impacts of State-Level Opioid Review Programs on Injured Workers and Their Health Care Providers: A Qualitative Study in Washington and Ohio.The Milbank quarterly · 2024Article
- Trajectories and predictors of high-occurrence pain flares in ambulatory cancer patients on opioids.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Article
- Associations Between Management Pathway and Opioid Prescriptions for Patients Entering the Emergency Department With Neck and Back Pain.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2023Article
- A multi-disciplinary program for opioid sparse arthroplasty results in reduced long-term opioid consumption: a four year prospective study.BMC anesthesiology · 2023Observational
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIn response to the opioid crisis, opioid analgesic guidelines and prescribing limits have proliferated. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine evidence from studies evaluating the patient or public health impact of federal and state opioid analgesic prescribing guidelines and laws, describe gaps and challenges in current research, and highlight opportunities for improving future research.
methodsWe focused on evidence from a literature review covering 2013 through 2019. We identified 30 studies evaluating opioid analgesic thresholds based on federal policies and guidelines, state laws, and Medicaid state plans that attempt to influence the course of patient care at or when the limit is exceeded (e.g., prior authorization).
resultsMost studies evaluated changes in prescribing or dispensing patterns of opioid analgesics, largely finding decreases in prescribing after policy enactment. Fewer studies evaluated patient or public health outcomes beyond changes in prescribing and dispensing patterns; results were infrequently stratified by potentially important sociodemographic and clinical factors. No studies assessed the potential for adverse patient outcomes for which we have emerging evidence of harms.
conclusionsWe describe knowledge gaps and propose opportunities for future research to sufficiently assess the potential impact and unintended consequences of opioid analgesic prescribing laws, regulations, guidelines, and policies.
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.