Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41026489›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2025

Health Care Professional Willingness to Treat Opioid Use Disorder vs Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care.

Lindsay Y Dhanani, Daniel Brook, O Trent Hall, Ji Eun Chang, Berkeley Franz

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2025. 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.

Lindsay Y DhananiRutgers University School of Management and Labor Relations, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Daniel BrookDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora.
O Trent HallDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus.
Ji Eun ChangDepartment of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University, New York.
Berkeley FranzInstitute to Advance Health Equity, Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Athens.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: A substantial implementation gap remains for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs), which prevent overdose and associated morbidities. Primary care is an important setting for expanding access opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. Objective: To compare primary care professional (PCP) willingness to treat OUD vs type 2 diabetes in primary care and to assess whether patient race is associated with shaping decisions to treat either condition. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a 2 (chief concern of OUD compared with type 2 diabetes) × 2 (Black compared with White race) experimental design. Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants practicing in primary care or a related discipline in Ohio were randomly assigned to each condition and completed assessments between March 1 and June 6, 2024. Exposure: Participants received fictitious patient profiles that were identical except that they either described the chief concern as OUD or type 2 diabetes and specified the patient's race as Black or White. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical and attitudinal outcomes, including willingness to treat the patient in primary care, the amount of time the participant would spend with the patient, and perceptions of the likelihood of disease stabilization, were assessed using 5-point Likert scales (1 = extremely unlikely or strongly disagree, 5 = extremely unlikely or strongly agree). For OUD only, willingness to provide MOUD treatment and harm reduction were assessed. Results: A total of 375 participants provided complete data (mean [SD] age, 46.8 [13.6] years; 235 female [62.7%]), of whom 191 (50.9%) were physicians (MD or DO), 104 (27.7%) were nurse practitioners, and 80 (21.3%) were physician assistants. Participants viewed type 2 diabetes as more complicated to treat, viewed patients with type 2 diabetes as more responsible for their diagnosis, and had more empathy toward patients with OUD. Participants were significantly more willing to treat type 2 diabetes in primary care (mean [SD], 4.4 [0.1] vs 3.6 [0.1] in the OUD condition) and more likely to refer patients with OUD to a specialist (mean [SD], 4.4 [0.1] vs 3.3 [0.1] in the type 2 diabetes condition). No significant treatment differences were found by patient race. Participants were moderately likely to prescribe an MOUD to the hypothetical patient, with slightly higher willingness to prescribe naltrexone (mean [SD], 3.7 [1.2]) than buprenorphine (mean [SD], 3.4 [1.3]). The most strongly endorsed treatment was referral to an abstinence-based residential treatment organization (mean [SD], 3.9 [1.2]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that PCPs have positive attitudes toward treating OUD yet more willingness to treat type 2 diabetes in primary care. Future implementation studies are needed to support MOUD prescribing in primary care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Health PersonnelOpioid-Related DisordersPrimary Health CareAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOhio

Identifiers

PMID41026489
PMCPMC12485638

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.