ArticleThe International journal on drug policy2026
A comprehensive analysis of jurisdiction-specific laws related to scheduling or required prescription drug monitoring of gabapentin in the United States, 2016-2024.
Article in The International journal on drug policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gabapentin Use in Medicaid After Descheduling.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Impact of schedule V controlled substance classification of gabapentin on adult gabapentin-involved overdose rates, West Virginia, 2016-2019: A controlled time series analysis.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2026Article
- Decreased Gabapentin Prescription Fills Among Medicaid Enrollees Following State-Level Schedule V Controlled Substance Classification in Kentucky and West Virginia.Substance use & addiction journal · 2026Article
- A comprehensive analysis of jurisdiction-specific laws related to scheduling or required prescription drug monitoring of gabapentin in the United States, 2016-2024.The International journal on drug policy · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Gabapentin prescription use has increased across the United States since the late 2000s. Concerns of potential misuse and growing overdose involvement have led to the passage of jurisdiction-specific policies targeting gabapentin prescribing; however, the current legal landscape of these policies is not well documented or understood. We conducted a comprehensive, longitudinal analysis of policies related to scheduling or required prescription drug monitoring of gabapentin across 51 jurisdictions in the United States from January 2016 through December 2024. Across the study period, 25 jurisdictions (49 %) enacted policies related to gabapentin scheduling or required prescription reporting. Eight (16 %) jurisdictions classified gabapentin as a schedule V controlled substance and mandated reporting of gabapentin prescriptions in the jurisdiction's prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) and 17 (33 %) jurisdictions required the reporting of gabapentin prescriptions to the jurisdiction's PDMP but did not classify gabapentin as a schedule V controlled substance. Both scheduling and mandated reporting policies were largely concentrated between 2016 and 2019. Though policy changes were observed across the entirety of the continental United States, the majority of jurisdictions with policies were concentrated in the Appalachian and Eastern Midwest regions. Our results provide a strong basis for future research on the impact of gabapentin scheduling and prescription drug monitoring policies on prescribing, dispensing, health care utilization, and overdose involvement. Future discussions at the state and federal level can also be informed by this analysis of the current legal landscape of gabapentin prescribing policies in the United States.
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.