Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38268479›Full record

Observational studyPublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)

The Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Study: Methods and Initial Outcomes From an 18-Month Study of Patients in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder.

Jill A Dever, Marci F Hertz, Laura J Dunlap, John S Richardson, Sara Beth Wolicki, Bradley B Biggers, Mark J Edlund, Michele K Bohm, Didier Turcios, Xinyi Jiang and 3 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Emergency Department-Based Medication for Opioid Use Disorder: A 5-Year Experience.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. 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

13 authors.

Jill A DeverRTI International, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0601-9605
Marci F HertzCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Laura J DunlapRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
John S RichardsonRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Sara Beth WolickiCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Bradley B BiggersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Mark J EdlundRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Michele K BohmCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Didier TurciosRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Xinyi JiangCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Hong ZhouCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Mary E EvansCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Gery P GuyCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOpioid use disorder (OUD) affects approximately 5.6 million people in the United States annually, yet rates of the use of effective medication for OUD (MOUD) treatment are low. We conducted an observational cohort study from August 2017 through May 2021, the MOUD Study, to better understand treatment engagement and factors that may influence treatment experiences and outcomes. In this article, we describe the study design, data collected, and treatment outcomes.

methodsWe recruited adult patients receiving OUD treatment at US outpatient facilities for the MOUD Study. We collected patient-level data at 5 time points (baseline to 18 months) via self-administered questionnaires and health record data. We collected facility-level data via questionnaires administered to facility directors at 2 time points. Across 16 states, 62 OUD treatment facilities participated, and 1974 patients enrolled in the study. We summarized descriptive data on the characteristics of patients and OUD treatment facilities and selected treatment outcomes.

resultsApproximately half of the 62 facilities were private, nonprofit organizations; 62% focused primarily on substance use treatment; and 20% also offered mental health services. Most participants were receiving methadone (61%) or buprenorphine (32%) and were predominately non-Hispanic White (68%), aged 25-44 years (62%), and female (54%). Compared with patient-reported estimates at baseline, 18-month estimates suggested that rates of abstinence increased (55% to 77%), and rates of opioid-related overdoses (7% to 2%), emergency department visits (9% to 4%), and arrests (15% to 7%) decreased.

conclusionsOur results demonstrated the benefits of treatment retention not only on abstinence from opioid use but also on other quality-of-life metrics, with data collected during an extended period. The MOUD Study produced rich, multilevel data that can lay the foundation for an evidence base to inform OUD treatment and support improvement of care and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Opiate Substitution TreatmentOpioid-Related DisordersAdultAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMethadoneMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineMethadonebuprenorphinemethadoneMOUDnaltrexoneopioid use disorder (OUD)outpatient treatment

Identifiers

PMID38268479
PMCPMC11284976

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.