ReviewSAGE open medicine2026
Outcomes associated with an inpatient addiction consult service: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in SAGE open medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with substance use disorder (SUD) have high rates of hospitalization, readmission, and prolonged lengths of stay. Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of addiction consult services in the inpatient setting for patients with SUD. Methods: Five databases were systematically searched from their earliest available records through January 2025. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of each study with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized clinical trials. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes. Results: The search retrieved 20 studies that met inclusion criteria. The intervention for all studies was an addiction medicine consult, but the definition of this consult varied. The meta-analysis did not detect statistically significant differences in hospital length of stay, hospital readmission, or emergency department visits at 1 year among patients who received the consult compared with those who did not; however, many of these outcomes were likely underpowered. However, addiction medicine consults significantly improved the odds of inpatient initiation of medication for SUD (OR, 7.30; 95% CI, 3.30-16.13; Conclusion: Inpatient addiction consult services are associated with increased inpatient initiation of medication for SUD treatment and postdischarge treatment linkage and adherence. No clear association was identified between the consult and readmissions, emergency department utilization, or length of stay.
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.