The opioid use disorder core outcomes set (OUD-COS) for treatment research: findings from a Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is no gold-standard and considerable heterogeneity in outcome measures used to evaluate treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) along the opioid treatment cascade. The aim of this study was to develop the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) opioid use disorder core outcomes set (OUD-COS). DESIGN: Four-round, e-Delphi expert panel consensus study and plenary research group discussion and targeted consultation. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: A panel of 25 members including clinical practitioners, clinical researchers and administrative staff from the CTN, the network's affiliated clinical and community sites and the NIDA Centre for the CTN. MEASUREMENTS: From a pool of 24 candidate items in four domains (biomedical/disease status; behaviors, symptoms and functioning; opioid treatment cascade; and morbidity and mortality), the panel completed an on-line questionnaire to rank items with defined specification on a 9-point scale for importance, with a standard 70% consensus criterion. FINDINGS: After the fourth round of the questionnaire and subsequent discussion, consensus was reached for five outcomes: two patient-reported (global impression of improvement and incident non-fatal overdose); one clinician-reported (illicit/non-medical drug toxicology); and two from administrative records (duration of treatment and fatal opioid poisoning). CONCLUSIONS: An e-Delphi consensus study has produced the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network opioid use disorder core outcomes set (version 1) for opioid use disorder treatment efficacy and effectiveness research.

Investigating Unhealthy Alcohol Use As an Independent Risk Factor for Increased COVID-19 Disease Severity: Observational Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is known to disrupt pulmonary immune mechanisms and increase the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome in patients with pneumonia; however, little is known about the effects of UAU on outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. To our knowledge, this is the first observational cross-sectional study that aims to understand the effect of UAU on the severity of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: We aim to determine if UAU is associated with more severe clinical presentation and worse health outcomes related to COVID-19 and if socioeconomic status, smoking, age, BMI, race/ethnicity, and pattern of alcohol use modify the risk. METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study that took place between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, we ran a digital machine learning classifier on the electronic health record of patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via nasopharyngeal swab or had two COVID-19 International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes to identify patients with UAU. After controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, BMI, smoking status, insurance status, and presence of ICD-10 codes for cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes, we then performed a multivariable regression to examine the relationship between UAU and COVID-19 severity as measured by hospital care level (ie, emergency department admission, emergency department admission with ventilator, or death). We used a predefined cutoff with optimal sensitivity and specificity on the digital classifier to compare disease severity in patients with and without UAU. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, BMI, smoking status, and insurance status. RESULTS: Each incremental increase in the predicted probability from the digital alcohol classifier was associated with a greater odds risk for more severe COVID-19 disease (odds ratio 1.15, 95% CI 1.10-1.20). We found that patients in the unhealthy alcohol group had a greater odds risk to develop more severe disease (odds ratio 1.89, 95% CI 1.17-3.06), suggesting that UAU was associated with an 89% increase in the odds of being in a higher severity category. CONCLUSIONS: In patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, UAU is an independent risk factor associated with greater disease severity and/or death.

Bias and fairness assessment of a natural language processing opioid misuse classifier: detection and mitigation of electronic health record data disadvantages across racial subgroups.

OBJECTIVES: To assess fairness and bias of a previously validated machine learning opioid misuse classifier. MATERIALS & METHODS: Two experiments were conducted with the classifier's original (n = 1000) and external validation (n = 53 974) datasets from 2 health systems. Bias was assessed via testing for differences in type II error rates across racial/ethnic subgroups (Black, Hispanic/Latinx, White, Other) using bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals. A local surrogate model was estimated to interpret the classifier's predictions by race and averaged globally from the datasets. Subgroup analyses and post-hoc recalibrations were conducted to attempt to mitigate biased metrics. RESULTS: We identified bias in the false negative rate (FNR = 0.32) of the Black subgroup compared to the FNR (0.17) of the White subgroup. Top features included "heroin" and "substance abuse" across subgroups. Post-hoc recalibrations eliminated bias in FNR with minimal changes in other subgroup error metrics. The Black FNR subgroup had higher risk scores for readmission and mortality than the White FNR subgroup, and a higher mortality risk score than the Black true positive subgroup (P < .05). DISCUSSION: The Black FNR subgroup had the greatest severity of disease and risk for poor outcomes. Similar features were present between subgroups for predicting opioid misuse, but inequities were present. Post-hoc mitigation techniques mitigated bias in type II error rate without creating substantial type I error rates. From model design through deployment, bias and data disadvantages should be systematically addressed. CONCLUSION: Standardized, transparent bias assessments are needed to improve trustworthiness in clinical machine learning models.