Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35319762›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Use of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder Among US Adolescents and Adults With Need for Opioid Treatment, 2019.

Pia M Mauro, Sarah Gutkind, Erin M Annunziato, Hillary Samples

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 143 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
143citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
41.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

143 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 214 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Evidence Base on Outpatient Behavioral Treatments for Adolescent Substance Use, Update 2018-2023: Current Status, Best Practices, and Opportunities for Advancing the Science.Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

83 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pia M MauroDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York.
Sarah GutkindDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York.
Erin M AnnunziatoDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York.
Hillary SamplesCenter for Health Sciences Research, Rutgers Institute for Health, Health Care Policy and Aging Research, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Columbia University · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Training Program (SAETP) at Columbia UniversityT32DA031099 · NIDA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI DEBORAH S HASIN, Silvia Saboia Martins · 2012 to 2026
$6.1M
Multi-level associations between opioid use and overdose: Individual, clinical, and population-based risk factors for fatalityK01DA049950 · NIDA · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL/HEALTH SCIENCES-RBHS · PI SAMPLES, HILLARY · 2020 to 2024
$981k
Multi-level associations between medical marijuana laws and substance use disorder treatmentK01DA045224 · NIDA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI MAURO, PIA M. · 2018 to 2022
$878k
NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA045224NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA049950NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA031099
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the criterion standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), but nationally representative studies of MOUD use in the US are lacking. Objective: To estimate MOUD use rates and identify associations between MOUD and individual characteristics among people who may have needed treatment for OUD. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional, nationally representative study using the 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health in the US. Participants included community-based, noninstitutionalized adolescent and adult respondents identified as individuals who may benefit from MOUD, defined as (1) meeting criteria for a past-year OUD, (2) reporting past-year MOUD use, or (3) receiving past-year specialty treatment for opioid use in the last or current treatment episode. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were treatment with MOUD compared with non-MOUD services and no treatment. Associations with sociodemographic characteristics (eg, age, race and ethnicity, sex, income, and urbanicity); substance use disorders; and past-year health care or criminal legal system contacts were analyzed. Multinomial logistic regression was used to compare characteristics of people receiving MOUD with those receiving non-MOUD services or no treatment. Models accounted for predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics. Results: In the weighted sample of 2 206 169 people who may have needed OUD treatment (55.5% male; 8.0% Hispanic; 9.9% non-Hispanic Black; 74.6% non-Hispanic White; and 7.5% categorized as non-Hispanic other, with other including 2.7% Asian, 0.9% Native American or Alaska Native, 0.2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 3.8% multiracial), 55.1% were aged 35 years or older, 53.7% were publicly insured, 52.2% lived in a large metropolitan area, 56.8% had past-year prescription OUD, and 80.0% had 1 or more co-occurring substance use disorders (percentages are weighted). Only 27.8% of people needing OUD treatment received MOUD in the past year. Notably, no adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and only 13.2% of adults 50 years and older reported past-year MOUD use. Among adults, the likelihood of past-year MOUD receipt vs no treatment was lower for people aged 50 years and older vs 18 to 25 years (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR], 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.41) or with middle or higher income (eg, $50 000-$74 999 vs $0-$19 999; aRRR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.07-0.44). Compared with receiving non-MOUD services, receipt of MOUD was more likely among adults with at least some college (vs high school or less; aRRR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.33-6.51) and less likely in small metropolitan areas (vs large metropolitan areas, aRRR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19-0.93). While contacts with the health care system (85.0%) and criminal legal system (60.5%) were common, most people encountering these systems did not report receiving MOUD (29.5% and 39.1%, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, MOUD uptake was low among people who could have benefited from treatment, especially adolescents and older adults. The high prevalence of health care and criminal legal system contacts suggests that there are critical gaps in care delivery or linkage and that cross-system integrated interventions are warranted.

Indexed as

BuprenorphineOpioid-Related DisordersAdolescentAgedAnalgesics, OpioidCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOpiate Substitution TreatmentAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphine

Identifiers

PMID35319762
PMCPMC8943638
OpenAlexW4220780040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.