定义评估过量反应技术的术语和结果测量:一项国际德尔菲研究。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
William Rioux, Dylan Viste, Navid Sedaghat, Nathan Rider, Joseph Tay Wee Tek, Melissa Perri, David G. Schwartz, Kim Ritchie, Giuseppe Carrà, Stephanie Carreiro, Oona Kreig, Gabriela Marcu, Joseph Arthur, Joanne Cogdell, Mike Brown, Tyler Marshall, S. Monty Ghosh
{"title":"定义评估过量反应技术的术语和结果测量:一项国际德尔菲研究。","authors":"William Rioux,&nbsp;Dylan Viste,&nbsp;Navid Sedaghat,&nbsp;Nathan Rider,&nbsp;Joseph Tay Wee Tek,&nbsp;Melissa Perri,&nbsp;David G. Schwartz,&nbsp;Kim Ritchie,&nbsp;Giuseppe Carrà,&nbsp;Stephanie Carreiro,&nbsp;Oona Kreig,&nbsp;Gabriela Marcu,&nbsp;Joseph Arthur,&nbsp;Joanne Cogdell,&nbsp;Mike Brown,&nbsp;Tyler Marshall,&nbsp;S. Monty Ghosh","doi":"10.1111/dar.14055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Various novel harm reduction services leverage technology to reduce the rising number of drug poisoning deaths, particularly among those who use drugs alone. There is significant variability in terminology and outcome measures in reporting these interventions, complicating efforts to build a comprehensive knowledge base. Thus, we conducted a Delphi study to establish consensus and heterogeneity in these metrics.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Panellists from three stakeholder groups (people who use drugs, virtual harm reduction service operators and academics) participated in a multi-round Delphi study. The first round included open-ended questions to propose items in three categories: terminology, demographic information and outcomes. Subsequent rounds included options from a previously conducted scoping review for consideration. Likert ratings were used to achieve consensus, with a 70% threshold. Final rounds involved ranking terminology that reached a consensus.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of 23 initial participants, 14 completed the fourth survey round. “Overdose response technology” was identified as the most appropriate term for these harm reduction technologies. This definition includes drug contamination alerts, overdose response hotlines and applications, wearable overdose detection technology and overdose detection tools. Fourteen demographic outcomes reached a consensus for data collection, including name or handle, neighbourhood, age, gender, past overdose experience, substance used, amount and route of use. Six service use outcomes were recommended: response type, service outcomes, morbidity and mortality, overdose events, responder arrival time and post-rescue care.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Discussion and Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The study results are recommended to standardise terminology and guide future research and knowledge dissemination in the field, ensuring clear communication with a shared language.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11318,"journal":{"name":"Drug and alcohol review","volume":"44 5","pages":"1430-1443"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dar.14055","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining terminology and outcome measures for evaluating overdose response technology: An international Delphi study\",\"authors\":\"William Rioux,&nbsp;Dylan Viste,&nbsp;Navid Sedaghat,&nbsp;Nathan Rider,&nbsp;Joseph Tay Wee Tek,&nbsp;Melissa Perri,&nbsp;David G. Schwartz,&nbsp;Kim Ritchie,&nbsp;Giuseppe Carrà,&nbsp;Stephanie Carreiro,&nbsp;Oona Kreig,&nbsp;Gabriela Marcu,&nbsp;Joseph Arthur,&nbsp;Joanne Cogdell,&nbsp;Mike Brown,&nbsp;Tyler Marshall,&nbsp;S. Monty Ghosh\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dar.14055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Various novel harm reduction services leverage technology to reduce the rising number of drug poisoning deaths, particularly among those who use drugs alone. There is significant variability in terminology and outcome measures in reporting these interventions, complicating efforts to build a comprehensive knowledge base. Thus, we conducted a Delphi study to establish consensus and heterogeneity in these metrics.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Panellists from three stakeholder groups (people who use drugs, virtual harm reduction service operators and academics) participated in a multi-round Delphi study. The first round included open-ended questions to propose items in three categories: terminology, demographic information and outcomes. Subsequent rounds included options from a previously conducted scoping review for consideration. Likert ratings were used to achieve consensus, with a 70% threshold. Final rounds involved ranking terminology that reached a consensus.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of 23 initial participants, 14 completed the fourth survey round. “Overdose response technology” was identified as the most appropriate term for these harm reduction technologies. This definition includes drug contamination alerts, overdose response hotlines and applications, wearable overdose detection technology and overdose detection tools. Fourteen demographic outcomes reached a consensus for data collection, including name or handle, neighbourhood, age, gender, past overdose experience, substance used, amount and route of use. Six service use outcomes were recommended: response type, service outcomes, morbidity and mortality, overdose events, responder arrival time and post-rescue care.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Discussion and Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study results are recommended to standardise terminology and guide future research and knowledge dissemination in the field, ensuring clear communication with a shared language.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug and alcohol review\",\"volume\":\"44 5\",\"pages\":\"1430-1443\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dar.14055\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug and alcohol review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.14055\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug and alcohol review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.14055","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:各种新型的减少危害服务利用技术来减少不断增加的药物中毒死亡人数,特别是那些单独使用药物的人。在报告这些干预措施时,术语和结果衡量标准存在显著差异,使建立全面知识库的工作复杂化。因此,我们进行了德尔菲研究,以建立这些指标的共识和异质性。方法:来自三个利益相关者群体(吸毒者、虚拟减少伤害服务运营商和学者)的小组成员参加了多轮德尔菲研究。第一轮包括不限成员名额的问题,提出三个类别的项目:术语、人口资料和结果。随后的几轮包括先前进行的范围审查的备选方案供审议。李克特评分用于达成共识,有70%的阈值。最后几轮涉及对达成共识的术语进行排名。结果:23名初始参与者中,14人完成了第四轮调查。“过量反应技术”被确定为这些减少危害技术的最适当术语。该定义包括药物污染警报、过量响应热线和应用、可穿戴过量检测技术和过量检测工具。14项人口统计结果在数据收集方面达成了共识,包括姓名或姓名、社区、年龄、性别、过去的过量经验、使用的物质、数量和使用途径。推荐了六个服务使用结果:响应类型、服务结果、发病率和死亡率、过量事件、响应者到达时间和救援后护理。讨论和结论:建议研究结果用于规范术语,指导该领域未来的研究和知识传播,确保使用共享语言进行清晰的交流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Defining terminology and outcome measures for evaluating overdose response technology: An international Delphi study

Defining terminology and outcome measures for evaluating overdose response technology: An international Delphi study

Introduction

Various novel harm reduction services leverage technology to reduce the rising number of drug poisoning deaths, particularly among those who use drugs alone. There is significant variability in terminology and outcome measures in reporting these interventions, complicating efforts to build a comprehensive knowledge base. Thus, we conducted a Delphi study to establish consensus and heterogeneity in these metrics.

Methods

Panellists from three stakeholder groups (people who use drugs, virtual harm reduction service operators and academics) participated in a multi-round Delphi study. The first round included open-ended questions to propose items in three categories: terminology, demographic information and outcomes. Subsequent rounds included options from a previously conducted scoping review for consideration. Likert ratings were used to achieve consensus, with a 70% threshold. Final rounds involved ranking terminology that reached a consensus.

Results

Of 23 initial participants, 14 completed the fourth survey round. “Overdose response technology” was identified as the most appropriate term for these harm reduction technologies. This definition includes drug contamination alerts, overdose response hotlines and applications, wearable overdose detection technology and overdose detection tools. Fourteen demographic outcomes reached a consensus for data collection, including name or handle, neighbourhood, age, gender, past overdose experience, substance used, amount and route of use. Six service use outcomes were recommended: response type, service outcomes, morbidity and mortality, overdose events, responder arrival time and post-rescue care.

Discussion and Conclusions

The study results are recommended to standardise terminology and guide future research and knowledge dissemination in the field, ensuring clear communication with a shared language.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Drug and alcohol review
Drug and alcohol review SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
10.50%
发文量
151
期刊介绍: Drug and Alcohol Review is an international meeting ground for the views, expertise and experience of all those involved in studying alcohol, tobacco and drug problems. Contributors to the Journal examine and report on alcohol and drug use from a wide range of clinical, biomedical, epidemiological, psychological and sociological perspectives. Drug and Alcohol Review particularly encourages the submission of papers which have a harm reduction perspective. However, all philosophies will find a place in the Journal: the principal criterion for publication of papers is their quality.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信