Natalie Sumetsky1, Christina Mair1, Katherine Wheeler-Martin2, Magdalena Cerda2, Lance A Waller3, William R Ponicki4, Paul J Gruenewald4. 1. From the Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA. 2. Center for Opioid Epidemiology and Policy, Division of Epidemiology, Department of Population Health, New York University, New York, NY. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA. 4. Prevention Research Center, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Berkeley, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rapid growth of opioid abuse and the related mortality across the United States has spurred the development of predictive models for the allocation of public health resources. These models should characterize heterogeneous growth across states using a drug epidemic framework that enables assessments of epidemic onset, rates of growth, and limited capacities for epidemic growth. METHODS: We used opioid overdose mortality data for 146 North and South Carolina counties from 2001 through 2014 to compare the retrodictive and predictive performance of a logistic growth model that parameterizes onsets, growth, and carrying capacity within a traditional Bayesian Poisson space-time model. RESULTS: In fitting the models to past data, the performance of the logistic growth model was superior to the standard Bayesian Poisson space-time model (deviance information criterion: 8,088 vs. 8,256), with reduced spatial and independent errors. Predictively, the logistic model more accurately estimated fatality rates 1, 2, and 3 years in the future (root mean squared error medians were lower for 95.7% of counties from 2012 to 2014). Capacity limits were higher in counties with greater population size, percent population age 45-64, and percent white population. Epidemic onset was associated with greater same-year and past-year incidence of overdose hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: Growth in annual rates of opioid fatalities was capacity limited, heterogeneous across counties, and spatially correlated, requiring spatial epidemic models for the accurate and reliable prediction of future outcomes related to opioid abuse. Indicators of risk are identifiable and can be used to predict future mortality outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The rapid growth of opioid abuse and the related mortality across the United States has spurred the development of predictive models for the allocation of public health resources. These models should characterize heterogeneous growth across states using a drug epidemic framework that enables assessments of epidemic onset, rates of growth, and limited capacities for epidemic growth. METHODS: We used opioid overdose mortality data for 146 North and South Carolina counties from 2001 through 2014 to compare the retrodictive and predictive performance of a logistic growth model that parameterizes onsets, growth, and carrying capacity within a traditional Bayesian Poisson space-time model. RESULTS: In fitting the models to past data, the performance of the logistic growth model was superior to the standard Bayesian Poisson space-time model (deviance information criterion: 8,088 vs. 8,256), with reduced spatial and independent errors. Predictively, the logistic model more accurately estimated fatality rates 1, 2, and 3 years in the future (root mean squared error medians were lower for 95.7% of counties from 2012 to 2014). Capacity limits were higher in counties with greater population size, percent population age 45-64, and percent white population. Epidemic onset was associated with greater same-year and past-year incidence of overdose hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: Growth in annual rates of opioid fatalities was capacity limited, heterogeneous across counties, and spatially correlated, requiring spatial epidemic models for the accurate and reliable prediction of future outcomes related to opioid abuse. Indicators of risk are identifiable and can be used to predict future mortality outcomes.
Authors: Qiushi Chen; Marc R Larochelle; Davis T Weaver; Anna P Lietz; Peter P Mueller; Sarah Mercaldo; Sarah E Wakeman; Kenneth A Freedberg; Tiana J Raphel; Amy B Knudsen; Pari V Pandharipande; Jagpreet Chhatwal Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-02-01
Authors: Barbara Tempalski; Leslie D Williams; Marynia Kolak; Danielle C Ompad; Julia Koschinsky; Sara L McLafferty Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2022-06-07 Impact factor: 5.801
Authors: Karli R Hochstatter; Sonal Rastogi; Kathryn Klein; Cameron Tait-Ozer; Nabila El-Bassel; Jason Graham Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 4.135
Authors: Charles Marks; Daniela Abramovitz; Christl A Donnelly; Gabriel Carrasco-Escobar; Rocío Carrasco-Hernández; Daniel Ciccarone; Arturo González-Izquierdo; Natasha K Martin; Steffanie A Strathdee; Davey M Smith; Annick Bórquez Journal: Lancet Public Health Date: 2021-06-10