Delphi method applicability in drug foresight.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1186/s13011-024-00617-7
Tomi Lintonen, Karoliina Karjalainen, Sanna Rönkä, Elina Kotovirta, Solja Niemelä
{"title":"Delphi method applicability in drug foresight.","authors":"Tomi Lintonen, Karoliina Karjalainen, Sanna Rönkä, Elina Kotovirta, Solja Niemelä","doi":"10.1186/s13011-024-00617-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the current study was to assess the accuracy of expert predictions, which were derived using a Delphi panel foresight study between 2009 and 2011, on a variety of drug-related topics in Finland in 2020.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The material used to evaluate the accuracy of the predictions consists of published reports on statistics, survey results, official register data, wastewater analyses and official documents. Whenever possible, we used multiple information sources to ascertain possible changes related to the predictions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 2009 and 2011, the majority - but not all - of the experts accurately predicted an increase in drug use. Indeed, more people experimented with or used drugs, and more drug residues were found in wastewater monitoring. The experts also correctly predicted an increase in population-level approval of drug use, but this development has been rather slow. Contrary to predictions, there was no marked increase in the use of new synthetic drugs. However, the misuse of buprenorphine increased during the 2010s. In the drug market, unit prices were surprisingly stable over the ten-year period. There were no changes in legislation related to the legal status of drugs, as was foreseen by the experts. However, enforcement moved in the direction foreseen by the experts: more lenient measures have been taken against users. Drug care system reforms favored a combination of mental health and addiction care units between 2009 and 2011, and 2020, as foreseen by the experts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>It seems to have been easier for the experts to foresee the continuation of existing trends, e.g., increasing use of drugs or widening approval of drugs, than to predict possible changes in the popularity of distinct groups of drugs such as new psychoactive substances (NPS). Even armed with the prediction that drug imports and wholesale would increasingly fall into the domain of organized crime, this undesirable development could not be stopped. Expert disagreement can also be seen as a valuable indication of uncertainty regarding the future. Foresight related to drug-related issues can produce relatively accurate and realistic views of the future at least up to ten years ahead.</p>","PeriodicalId":22041,"journal":{"name":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","volume":"19 1","pages":"35"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11282797/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-024-00617-7","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

Abstract

Background: The aim of the current study was to assess the accuracy of expert predictions, which were derived using a Delphi panel foresight study between 2009 and 2011, on a variety of drug-related topics in Finland in 2020.

Methods: The material used to evaluate the accuracy of the predictions consists of published reports on statistics, survey results, official register data, wastewater analyses and official documents. Whenever possible, we used multiple information sources to ascertain possible changes related to the predictions.

Results: Between 2009 and 2011, the majority - but not all - of the experts accurately predicted an increase in drug use. Indeed, more people experimented with or used drugs, and more drug residues were found in wastewater monitoring. The experts also correctly predicted an increase in population-level approval of drug use, but this development has been rather slow. Contrary to predictions, there was no marked increase in the use of new synthetic drugs. However, the misuse of buprenorphine increased during the 2010s. In the drug market, unit prices were surprisingly stable over the ten-year period. There were no changes in legislation related to the legal status of drugs, as was foreseen by the experts. However, enforcement moved in the direction foreseen by the experts: more lenient measures have been taken against users. Drug care system reforms favored a combination of mental health and addiction care units between 2009 and 2011, and 2020, as foreseen by the experts.

Conclusions: It seems to have been easier for the experts to foresee the continuation of existing trends, e.g., increasing use of drugs or widening approval of drugs, than to predict possible changes in the popularity of distinct groups of drugs such as new psychoactive substances (NPS). Even armed with the prediction that drug imports and wholesale would increasingly fall into the domain of organized crime, this undesirable development could not be stopped. Expert disagreement can also be seen as a valuable indication of uncertainty regarding the future. Foresight related to drug-related issues can produce relatively accurate and realistic views of the future at least up to ten years ahead.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
德尔菲法在药物展望中的适用性。
研究背景本研究旨在评估专家预测的准确性,专家预测是在 2009 年至 2011 年期间通过德尔菲小组预测研究得出的,涉及 2020 年芬兰与毒品有关的各种主题:用于评估预测准确性的资料包括已发布的统计报告、调查结果、官方登记数据、废水分析和官方文件。在可能的情况下,我们使用多种信息来源来确定与预测相关的可能变化:结果:2009 年至 2011 年间,大多数(但不是全部)专家都准确预测了毒品使用的增加。事实上,更多的人尝试或使用毒品,在废水监测中发现了更多的毒品残留。专家们还正确地预测了在人口层面批准使用毒品的人数有所增加,但这一进展相当缓慢。与预测相反,新型合成药物的使用没有明显增加。不过,2010 年代滥用丁丙诺啡的情况有所增加。十年间,毒品市场的单价出奇地稳定。与毒品法律地位相关的立法没有发生变化,这在专家们的预料之中。然而,执法工作却朝着专家们预想的方向发展:对吸毒者采取了更为宽松的措施。正如专家们所预见的那样,2009 至 2011 年以及 2020 年期间,毒品护理系统的改革倾向于将精神健康和成瘾护理单位结合起来:专家们似乎更容易预见到现有趋势的持续,如毒品使用的增加或毒品批准范围的扩大,而不是预测新精神活性物质(NPS)等不同类别毒品受欢迎程度可能发生的变化。即使预测到毒品进口和批发将越来越多地进入有组织犯罪的领域,也无法阻止这种不良发展。专家的意见分歧也可以看作是对未来不确定性的一种宝贵暗示。与毒品问题相关的前瞻性研究至少可以在十年内对未来提出相对准确和现实的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that encompasses research concerning substance abuse, with a focus on policy issues. The journal aims to provide an environment for the exchange of ideas, new research, consensus papers, and critical reviews, to bridge the established fields that share a mutual goal of reducing the harms from substance use. These fields include: legislation pertaining to substance use; correctional supervision of people with substance use disorder; medical treatment and screening; mental health services; research; and evaluation of substance use disorder programs.
期刊最新文献
Enhancing the drug addiction treatment service by introducing a new residential treatment model in the Philippines: A qualitative study. COVID-19 public health restrictions and opioid overdoes: a summative content analysis of emergency medical services records in three Texas counties. The relationship between insecure attachment and nicotine dependence among users of classic cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and heated tobacco products: a moderated mediation model. Access and barriers to safer supply prescribing during a toxic drug emergency: a mixed methods study of implementation in British Columbia, Canada. Initiation and/or re-initiation of drug use among people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada from 2021 to 2022: a prospective cohort study.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1