Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40810406›Full record

ArticleJournal of addiction medicine

Opioid Use Disorder Screening Practices in US Jails.

Amanda M Bunting, Sami Sobh, Wen-Yu Lee, Matthew Lee, David Farabee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Amanda M BuntingNew York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY (AMB, SS, WYL, ML, DF).
Sami Sobh
Wen-Yu Lee
Matthew Lee
David Farabee

Funding

TRIALS Coordinating Center to Reduce Substance Use, HIV Risk Behaviors, & CrimeU01DA036221 · NIDA · CHESTNUT HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. · PI DENNIS, MICHAEL L., SCOTT, CHRISTY K · 2013 to 2019
$5.6M
Development of a novel polysubstance assessment tool for vulnerable subpopulationsK01DA053435 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI BUNTING, AMANDA M · 2021 to 2025
$909k
NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA053435NIDA NIH HHS U01 DA036221
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the screening processes for opioid use disorder by jails in localities with high concentrations of opioid involved overdose deaths.

methodsA secondary data analysis of structured interviews on opioid use disorder practices from 185 jails in the United States was conducted. Descriptive statistics detailed jail screening characteristics, and bivariate statistics examined the association between screening characteristics and annual jail population.

resultsThe majority of jails in high-overdose-burden localities had screening protocols in place for opioid use disorder (95.1%). The protocols varied, with most jails reporting the use of substance use (85.4%) or opioid use (77.0%) specific screeners. Yet few jails used validated screening tools (23.3%) and instead relied on agency or state-specific tools (89.0%). Significant differences by annual jail population were found related to who conducted screenings, such that the use of medical staff for screening ( P <0.01) and clinical assessments ( P <0.05) was more likely among larger jails.

conclusionsScreening and assessment of opioid use disorder is essential for individuals in jails, given the disproportionate burden of the disorder. Jails tended to rely on agency-created tools over the use of validated screeners, and more efforts may be needed to close the research-practice divide.

Indexed as

JailsMass ScreeningOpioid-Related DisordersPrisonersHumansUnited Statesjailopioid use disorderscreeningsubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID40810406
PMCPMC12833952

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.