Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 723

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Trends in Opioid Analgesic–Prescribing Rates by Specialty, U.S., 2007–2012

Open access
Levy, Benjamin, Paulozzi, Leonard, Mack, Karin A., Jones, Christopher M.·2015·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Introduction: Opioid analgesic prescriptions are driving trends in drug overdoses, but little is known about prescribing patterns among medical specialties. We conducted this study to examine the opioid-prescribing patterns of the medical specialties over time. Methods: IMS Health’s National Prescription Audit (NPA) estimated the annual counts of pharmaceutical prescriptions dispensed in the U.S. during 2007–2012. We grouped NPA prescriber specialty data by practice type for ease of analysis, and measured the distribution of total prescriptions and opioid prescriptions by specialty. We calculated the percentage of all prescriptions dispensed that were opioids, and evaluated changes in that rate by specialty during 2007–2012. The analysis was conducted in 2013. Results: In 2012, U.S. pharmacies and long-term care facilities dispensed 4.2 billion prescriptions, 289 million (6.8%) of which were opioids. Primary care specialties accounted for nearly half of all dispensed opioid prescriptions. The rate of opioid prescribing was highest for specialists in pain medicine (48.6%); surgery (36.5%); and physical medicine/rehabilitation (35.5%). The rate of opioid prescribing rose during 2007–2010 but leveled thereafter as most specialties reduced opioid use. The greatest percentage increase in opioid-prescribing rates during 2007–2012 occurred among physical medicine/rehabilitation specialists (+12.0%). The largest percentage drops in opioid-prescribing rates occurred in emergency medicine (−8.9%) and dentistry (−5.7%). Conclusions: The data indicate diverging trends in opioid prescribing among medical specialties in the U.S. during 2007–2012. Engaging the medical specialties individually is critical for continued improvement in the safe and effective treatment of pain.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.02.020

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 723

Metadata

Authors
Levy, B., Paulozzi, L., Mack, K. A., & Jones, C. M.
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-09
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
409-413
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2168667510
Cited by
723
References
0
FWCI
61.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Trends in Opioid Analgesic–Prescribing Rates by Specialty, U.S., 2007–2012. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.amepre.2015.02.020
The paper
Levy, B., Paulozzi, L., Mack, K. A., & Jones, C. M. (2015). Trends in Opioid Analgesic–Prescribing Rates by Specialty, U.S., 2007–2012. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2015.02.020

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.