ArticleBMJ open2025
Comparative effectiveness of take-home dosing schedules for opioid agonist treatment in British Columbia, Canada: a target trial emulation protocol using a population-based observational study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Methodological innovations to advance substance use disorder research: Proceedings of a NIDA workshop on target trial emulation and translational testing of digital health tools.Journal of substance use and addiction treatment · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe introduction of fentanyl and its analogues in the illicit drug supply has prompted greater emphasis on refining clinical treatment protocols to ensure sustained retention in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Take-home dosing may lessen the treatment burden on clients and thus reduce the risk of treatment discontinuation. The evidence base supporting the use of take-home dosing, including the optimal duration of dispensations, is, however, limited. The objective of this study is to determine the comparative effectiveness of alternative take-home dosing schedules, as observed in clinical practice in British Columbia, Canada from 2010 to 2022. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We propose to emulate a target trial with a population-level retrospective study of individuals initiating methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2022 who are 18 years of age or older and not currently incarcerated or pregnant with no history of cancer or palliative care. Our study will draw on nine linked health administrative databases from British Columbia and will evaluate take-home doses of 2-5 days, 6 days or >6 days compared with continuous daily dosing. The primary outcomes include OAT discontinuation and all-cause mortality on treatment. A causal per-protocol analysis is proposed with longitudinal matching and inverse probability of censoring weighting approaches to adjust for time-fixed and time-varying confounding. A range of sensitivity analyses will be executed to determine the robustness of results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol, cohort creation and analysis plan have been classified and approved as a quality improvement initiative by Providence Health Care Research Ethics Board and the Simon Fraser University Office of Research Ethics. Results will be disseminated and shared with local advocacy groups and decision-makers, developers of national and international clinical guidelines, presented at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals electronically and in print.
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.