The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Caution of Conclusions of a Meta-analysis Including Problematic Trials
Open accessAbstract
for the primary care physician, for example Indiana's "trigger" dose of 15 mg MEDD for more than 3 months, which is considerably lower than the CDC recommendations.Second, the authors conclude that their effect is a result of a "reduction with a plan that reduces opioids more slowly than current tapering algorithms," although their design does not permit a comparison between programs of differing lengths.One of our authors was a contributor to the proposed algorithm that they reference, with Berna and colleagues 5 conservatively concluding that "there is no published comparison of speed of tapers in patients with longterm opioid treatment for CNCP, although such research would be of great interest."Finally, the authors introduce a potentially cost-effective psychoeducational intervention, ie, a self-help book on reducing opioid use.Although the importance of self-help materials cannot be underestimated, the real challenges may occur as patients are tapered to lower doses, a process in which more targeted and intensive behavioral intervention remains critical.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.
Citations
Cites
Cockayne, S., Adamson, J., Lanham-New, S., Shearer, M. J., Gilbody, S., & Torgerson, D. J. (2006) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.166.12.1256 · Cited by 361
Torgerson, D. J. (2018) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.1127 · Cited by 20
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Avenell, A., Stewart, F., Grey, A., Gamble, G., & Bolland, M. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031909 · Cited by 59
Torgerson, D. J. (2018) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.1127 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Venue
- JAMA Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2018-06-01
- Volume
- 178
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 875
- ISSN
- 2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11845094
- OpenAlex
- W4250047533
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 0.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Keywords
- opioid tapering, chronic non-cancer pain, meta-analysis limitations, opioid use reduction, self-help intervention, behavioral interventions, primary care
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
