ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2025
Measuring Exposure to Opioids Using Self-Reported Medication Use Data Versus General Practitioner Prescription Records in the UK Biobank Study.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2025. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe ongoing global increase in opioid use necessitates studies examining long-term health impacts. Prospective cohorts frequently rely on self-reported medication use data which may be subject to several types of bias compared to more objective measurements. We evaluated the agreement between two opioid exposure measures in the UK Biobank (UKBB)-self-reported regular use and prescription-based indicators using linked general practitioner (GP) records.
methodsOur analysis included 171 813 UKBB participants with linked prescription records. At baseline, participants reported medications taken regularly (weekly, monthly, every 3 months). We assessed agreement between self-reported regular opioid use and opioid prescription records prior to enrollment across various look-back periods and prescription counts. Logistic regressions assessed factors associated with omission and commission.
resultsAgreement was moderate to substantial between self-reported opioid use and prescription records. The strongest agreement was observed for ≥ 3 prescriptions in the past 365 days (Cohen's Kappa = 0.66). Subgroup analysis showed better agreement for analgesic opioids (Kappa = 0.43-0.63) than for non-analgesic opioids (Kappa = 0.25-0.34). Omission odds were highest with increasing months since the last record and lowest for individuals with chronic pain. Commission odds were highest for individuals with chronic pain and lowest in married/partnered individuals.
conclusionsThis analysis indicates that self-reported regular opioid use in the UKBB could be a valid indicator for identifying individuals with repeated prescriptions for analgesic opioids in the past year, while also capturing opioid use from non-linked sources. However, agreement was low for non-analgesic opioids, suggesting limited utility of self-report for capturing use of these medications.
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.