ArticlePsychiatric research and clinical practice2023
Validation of Two Diagnostic Assessments for Opioid and Stimulant Use Disorder for Use by Non-Clinicians.
Article in Psychiatric research and clinical practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of screening and assessment tools for diagnosing opioid use disorder: A systematic review.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2025Review
- Pilot Findings From the First Legalized Mobile Retail Pharmacy Clinic in the United States for Infectious Disease Treatment and Prevention Tailored to Reach People Who Use Drugs.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Perspectives on benefits and risks of creation of an "injection drug use" billing code.Journal of substance use and addiction treatment · 2024Article
- Considerations when prescribing opioid agonist therapies for people living with HIV.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: The United States is in the fourth wave of the opioid epidemic marked by the increase in fentanyl and co-occurring stimulant use related overdose deaths. Measures are needed to quickly diagnose opioid and stimulant use disorders, yet current traditional diagnostic assessments pose barriers to providing rapid diagnoses. Methods: This study aimed to (1) validate an updated version of the Rapid Opioid Dependence Screen (RODS) from DSM-IV criteria for opioid dependence to the now DSM-5 moderate-to-severe opioid use disorder, the Rapid Opioid Use Disorder Assessment (ROUDA); and (2) create and validate the Rapid Stimulant Use Disorder Assessment to DSM-5 stimulant use disorder (RSUDA) when compared to the substance use disorder module from the DSM-5 version of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Results: One-hundred and fifty adults completed study assessments, 122 reported opioid misuse and 140 reported stimulant misuse within their lifetime. The ROUDA had a sensitivity of 82.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75.7, 89.2), specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 100, 100), and strong internal consistency Conclusions: The ROUDA and RSUDA are efficient and valid measures that can be administered by non-clinicians to rapidly diagnose opioid and stimulant use disorders.
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.