The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bending the prescription opioid dosing and mortality curves: Impact of the Washington State opioid dosing guideline
Abstract
Background: Opioid use and dosing for patients with chronic non‐cancer pain have dramatically increased over the past decade, resulting in a national epidemic of mortality associated with unintentional overdose, and increased risk of disability among injured workers. We assessed changes in opioid dosing patterns and opioid‐related mortality in the Washington State (WA) workers' compensation system following implementation of a specific WA opioid dosing guideline in April, 2007. Methods: Using detailed computerized billing data from WA workers' compensation, we report overall prevalence of opioid prescriptions, average morphine‐equivalent dose (MED)/day, and proportion of workers on disability compensation receiving opioids and high‐dose (≥120 mg/day MED) opioids over the past decade. We also report the trend of unintentional opioid deaths during the same time period. Results: Compared to before 2007, there has been a substantial decline in both the MED/day of long‐acting DEA Schedule II opioids (by 27%) and the proportion of workers on doses ≥120 md/day MED (by 35%). There was a 50% decrease from 2009 to 2010 in the number of deaths. Conclusions: The introduction in WA of an opioid dosing guideline appears to be associated temporally with a decline in the mean dose for long‐acting opioids, percent of claimants receiving opioid doses ≥120 mg MED per day, and number of opioid‐related deaths among injured workers. Am. J. Ind. Med. 55:325–331, 2012. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Association Between Opioid Prescribing Patterns and Opioid Overdose-Related Deaths
Bohnert, A. S. B. (2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.370 · Cited by 1,509
Increasing deaths from opioid analgesics in the United States
Paulozzi, L. J., Budnitz, D. S., & Xi, Y. (2006) · Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety · doi:10.1002/pds.1276 · Cited by 696
Cited by
Chou, R., Turner, J. A., Devine, E. B., Hansen, R. N., Sullivan, S. D., Blazina, I., Dana, T., Bougatsos, C., & Deyo, R. A. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-2559 · Cited by 1,606
Self-citationU.S. Department of Health and Human (2015) · Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.3109/15360288.2015.1037530 · Cited by 891
Deyo, R. A., Von Korff, M., & Duhrkoop, D. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g6380 · Cited by 507
ASIPP, A. (2012) · Pain Physician · doi:10.36076/ppj.2012/15/s67 · Cited by 386
King, N. B., Fraser, V., Boikos, C., Richardson, R., & Harper, S. (2014) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2014.301966 · Cited by 310
Metadata
- Authors
- Franklin, G. M., Mai, J., Turner, J., Sullivan, M., Wickizer, T., & Fulton‐Kehoe, D.
- Venue
- American Journal of Industrial Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-12-27
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 325-331
- ISSN
- 0271-3586 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0274
- OpenAlex
- W2108887869
- Cited by
- 173
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.