Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37682922›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Capturing drug use patterns at a glance: An n-ary word sufficient statistic for repeated univariate categorical values.

Gabriel J Odom, Laura Brandt, Clinton Castro, Sean X Luo, Daniel J Feaster, Raymond R Balise, CTN-0094 Team

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Gabriel J OdomDepartment of Biostatistics, Florida International University, Miami, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1341-4555
Laura BrandtDepartment of Psychology, The City College of New York, New York City, NY, United States of America.
Clinton CastroThe Information School, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Sean X LuoDepartment of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York City, NY, United States of America.
Daniel J FeasterDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, The University of Miami, Miami, FL, United States of America.
Raymond R BaliseDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, The University of Miami, Miami, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9856-5901
CTN-0094 Team
University of Miami · USCity College of New York · USColumbia University · USFlorida International University · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Project-003UG1DA013035 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Aimee N Campbell, Jennifer McNeely · 2015 to 2026
$130.3M
The Florida Node Alliance of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials NetworkUG1DA013720 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Daniel J Feaster, Viviana Elizabeth Horigian · 2015 to 2026
$50.6M
Training Program on HIV and Substance Use in the Criminal Justice SystemT32DA037801 · NIDA · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Nabila El-Bassel, Lisa R Metsch · 2014 to 2026
$5.7M
NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA037801NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013035NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe efficacy of treatments for substance use disorders (SUD) is tested in clinical trials in which participants typically provide urine samples to detect whether the person has used certain substances via urine drug screenings (UDS). UDS data form the foundation of treatment outcome assessment in the vast majority of SUD clinical trials. However, existing methods to calculate treatment outcomes are not standardized, impeding comparability between studies and prohibiting reproducibility of results.

methodsWe extended the concept of a binary UDS variable to multiple categories: "+" [positive for substance(s) of interest], "-" [negative for substance(s)], "o" [patient failed to provide sample], "*" [inconclusive or mixed results], and "_" [no specimens required per study design]. This construct can be used to create a standardized and sufficient representation of UDS datastreams and sufficiently collapses longitudinal records into a single, compact "word", which preserves all information contained in the original data.

resultsWe developed the R software package CTNote (available on CRAN) as a tool to enable computers to parse these "words". The software package contains five groups of routines: detect a substance use pattern, account for a specific trial protocol, handle missing UDS data, measure the longest period of consecutive behavior, and count substance use events. Executing permutations of these routines result in algorithms which can define SUD clinical trial endpoints. As examples, we provide three algorithms to define primary endpoints from seminal SUD clinical trials. DISCUSSION: Representing substance use patterns as a "word" allows researchers and clinicians an "at a glance" assessment of participants' responses to treatment over time. Further, machine readable use pattern summaries are a standardized method to calculate treatment outcomes and are therefore useful to all future SUD clinical trials. We discuss some caveats when applying this data summarization technique in practice and areas of future study.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSubstance-Related DisordersHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareReproducibility of ResultsResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID37682922
PMCPMC10490938
OpenAlexW4386536180

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.