Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35647581›Full record

ReviewJAMA health forum2021

Assessment of State and Federal Health Policies for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond.

Seema Choksy Pessar, Anne Boustead, Yimin Ge, Rosanna Smart, Rosalie Liccardo Pacula

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JAMA health forum, 2021. 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 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Insurance coverage and provision of opioid disorder treatment: Evidence from Medicare.Journal of policy analysis and management : [the journal of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management] · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Seema Choksy PessarSchaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Anne BousteadSchool of Government and Public Policy, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Yimin GeSol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Rosanna SmartRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.
Rosalie Liccardo PaculaSchaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
University of Southern California · USRAND Corporation · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

Optimal Methods for Estimating Policy Effect Heterogeneity in Opioid Policy ResearchP50DA046351 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI BRADLEY D STEIN · 2018 to 2026
$20.8M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA046351
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceFederal and state governments implemented temporary strategies for providing access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Advocates hope many of these policies become permanent because of their potential to expand access to care.

objectiveTo consider the multitude of ways access to and utilization of treatment for individuals with OUD might have been expanded by state and federal policy so researchers can do a better job evaluating the effectiveness of specific policy approaches, which will depend on the interaction with other state policies. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We summarize state-level policy data reported by government and nonprofit agencies that track health care regulations, specifically the Kaiser Family Foundation, Federation of State Medical Boards, American Association of Nurse Practitioners, American Academy of Physician Assistants, and the National Safety Council. Data were collected by these sources from September 2020 through January 2021. We examine heterogeneity in policy elements adopted across states during the COVID-19 pandemic in 4 key areas: telehealth, privacy, licensing, and medication for opioid use disorder. The analysis was conducted from March 2020 through January 2021.

findingsThis cross-sectional study found that federal and state governments have taken important steps to ensure OUD treatment availability during the COVID-19 pandemic, but few states are comprehensive in their approach. Although all states and Washington, DC have adopted at least 1 telehealth policy, only 17 states have adopted telehealth policies that improve access to OUD treatment for new patients. Furthermore, only 9 states relaxed privacy laws, which influence the ability to use particular technology for telehealth visits. Similarly, all states have adopted at least 1 policy related to health care professional licensing permissions, but only 35 expanded the scope of practice laws for both physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Forty-four states expanded access to initiation and delivery of medication for OUD treatment. Together, no state has implemented all of these policies to comprehensively expand access to OUD treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: With considerable policy changes potentially affecting access to treatment and treatment retention for patients with OUD during the pandemic, evaluations must account for the variation in state approaches in related policy areas because the interactions between policies may limit the potential effectiveness of any single policy approach.

Indexed as

COVID-19Opioid-Related DisordersCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PolicyHumansPandemicsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35647581
PMCPMC9138185
OpenAlexW3214882210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.