ArticleJournal of substance use and addiction treatment2026
Patient preferences for medications to treat opioid use disorder in carceral settings: Implications for tailored implementation and service delivery.
Article in Journal of substance use and addiction treatment, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA critical lack of knowledge exists about incarcerated individuals' preferences for the provision of medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) in carceral settings (i.e., jail, prison) and of multilevel factors that influence preferences (e.g., health needs, institutional policies). This gap limits the ability to tailor MOUD programs effectively to patient needs and optimize outcomes within correctional systems.
methodsIn 2025, 28 adults receiving MOUD in the community in the Northeastern United States and who previously received MOUD while incarcerated completed an in-depth, semi-structured interview. Transcripts were generated and then coded using template thematic analysis. The social-ecological model informed the interview guide and analysis.
resultsDuring their most recent incarceration, most participants received methadone (64.3%), one-fourth received sublingual buprenorphine, and the remaining first received buprenorphine then switched to methadone (10.7%). Four themes corresponding to social-ecological levels were developed. First, the context of the carceral environment underlies the MOUD experience while incarcerated, wherein the use of surveillance measures influenced participant experiences of the MOUD program. Second, the delivery of MOUD was affected by logistical complications that influenced MOUD course and could result in participants switching MOUD type or intending to stop MOUD use in the future. Third, MOUD-focused interactions were most often with correctional officers and peers and less often with medical personnel, sometimes resulting in information gaps and perceived stigma magnification. Fourth, withdrawal alleviation and medication maintenance motivated the desire to receive any MOUD while incarcerated, while side effects and knowledge affected the selection of MOUD type. Patients advocated for specific organizational and structural changes to reduce difficulties and enhance comfort and safety (e.g., reducing delays to dosing at intake).
conclusionsWhile incarcerated, patient MOUD preferences are informed by several factors spanning social-ecological levels that allow MOUD receipt with more ease (i.e., quicker receipt at intake) and flexibility (i.e., dose changes), and fewer negative interpersonal and individual experiences (i.e., poor interactions, withdrawal, side effects). Patient-guided treatment adaptations have the potential to reach and sustain more patients, advancing equitable provision of MOUD in correctional systems.
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.