ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Biosurveillance and the Opioid Crisis in Emergency Medicine: Qualitative Study of Physician Perspectives.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In 2017, the US Department of Health and Human Services declared a national opioid crisis. In 2022, an estimated 81,806 overdose deaths involved an opioid. Emergency departments are critical in the pathway of care for providing resources and linkages to services. Studies investigating emergency medicine (EM) physicians' perspectives on the opioid crisis have largely focused on prescribing. objectives: To investigate EM physicians' perspectives on response strategies to the opioid crisis of biosurveillance and linkages to care. A secondary objective was to map reported challenges and recommendations using a sequential intercept model as an actionable framework. Methods: This is a qualitative study. Six EM physicians in an academic health care system were interviewed through semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed, then thematically coded and analyzed to identify cross-sector settings and barriers to care with corresponding recommendations. Settings and recommendations were mapped as a sequential intercept model. Results: EM physicians identified 9 key settings as crucial touch points in the opioid crisis: home setting, emergency medical services, patient care, clinically relevant data and information, prescriptions and pain management, predischarge coordination, outpatient resources, biosurveillance sample collection, and the external partner and administrative environment. Biosurveillance challenges included concerns about collecting biological materials for state and regional monitoring, as well as the time burden for sample collection. Linkage to care challenges included social determinants of health and limited outpatient care access. Recommendations were specific to each setting and included care coordination and fostering cross-sector partnerships. A patient-centered approach and better integration of community resources were emphasized. Conclusions: The service delivery culture is of acute and episodic care but needs to more seamlessly address care across its fragmented multicomponent complex system. EM physicians face systemic challenges and provide actionable recommendations to promote comprehensive care to patients presenting to the emergency department with opioid-related complaints.
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.