ArticleJournal of addiction medicine
A Quantitative Examination of Illness Models Among People With Opioid Use Disorder Receiving Methadone Treatment.
Article in Journal of addiction medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have examined illness models among people with addiction. We investigated illness models and their associations with demographics and treatment beliefs among patients receiving methadone treatment for opioid use disorder.
methodsFrom January 2019 to February 2020, patients receiving methadone treatment at outpatient opioid treatment programs provided demographics and rated using 1 to 7 Likert-type scales agreement with addiction illness models (brain disease model, chronic medical condition model [CMCM], and no explanation [NEM]) and treatment beliefs. Pairwise comparisons and multivariate regressions were used to examine associations between illness models, demographics, and treatment beliefs. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
resultsA total of 450 patients participated in the study. Forty percent self-identified as female, 13% as Hispanic, and 78% as White; mean age was 38.5 years. Brain disease model was the most frequently endorsed illness model (46.2%), followed by CMCM (41.7%) and NEM (21.9%). In multivariate analyses, agreement with brain disease model was significantly positively associated with beliefs that methadone treatment would be effective, counseling is important, and methadone is lifesaving, whereas agreement with CMCM was significantly positively associated with beliefs that methadone treatment would be effective, counseling is important, 12-step is the best treatment, taking methadone daily is important, and methadone is lifesaving. In multivariate analyses, agreement with NEM was negatively significantly associated with beliefs that methadone would be effective, counseling is important, taking methadone daily is important, and methadone is lifesaving. DISCUSSION: Many patients in methadone treatment endorsed medicalized addiction models. Agreement with addiction illness models appear to be related to treatment beliefs.
Indexed as
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.