Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40718503›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

An evidence-based digital prescription opioid safety toolkit for national dissemination: co-design and user testing.

Alex Waddell, Jessica L Watterson, Dhruv Basur, Christopher Owen Prawira, Louisa Picco, Tina Lam, Patrick Olivier, Joshua Paolo Seguin, Liam Kay, Suzanne Nielsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Alex WaddellAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jessica L WattersonAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Dhruv BasurAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Christopher Owen PrawiraAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Louisa PiccoMonash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Tina LamMonash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Patrick OlivierAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Joshua Paolo SeguinAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Liam KayAction Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Suzanne NielsenMonash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Australia has one of the highest rates of opioid prescribing and prescription opioid-related harm in the world. Although effective for pain relief, the use of prescription opioids is a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality. Barriers exist for consumers identifying their own risk factors, accessing naloxone (opioid overdose antidote) and overdose prevention education. This study aimed to co-design a digital Opioid Safety Toolkit for national dissemination through pharmacies to encourage three consumer opioid safety behaviours: (1) uptake of naloxone, (2) creating a safety plan, and (3) discussing their use of opioids, including any concerns with their healthcare professional. Methods: The digital Toolkit was co-designed and developed using a novel approach to digital health intervention design combining the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Double-Diamond design process. Co-design involved a series of seven iterative workshops with consumers (4) and professionals (3). Workshops focused on identifying factors influencing opioid safety behaviours, exploring design preferences, sense-checking, and ideation of the user flow. User testing was conducted with the penultimate version of the Toolkit. Results: 13 consumers with lived experience of prescription opioid use and 14 professionals including prescribers, pharmacists, pain specialists, researchers and consumer advocates participated in up to three separate workshops. 15 consumers participated in user testing interviews. Analysis of workshops identified factors promoting safety behaviours including increased public awareness of naloxone, understanding personal risk (TDF domain of Knowledge); healthcare professional's role in education and consumers' experience of stigma (Social/professional role and identity); use of conversational aids to scaffold conversations, material resources and data ownership (Environment, context and resources). User testing elicited feedback pertaining to the information and resources on the website and the overall user interface and experience. Discussion: The Toolkit was co-designed with consumers and professionals to facilitate opioid safety behaviours. The Toolkit includes evidence-based information, tools for risk assessment and screening, opioid use monitoring, conversation aids, and a safety plan. The Toolkit is being disseminated nationally through Australian pharmacies following a randomized controlled trial that demonstrated the Toolkit promotes safety behaviours, is easy to use and acceptable to those with lived experience of prescription opioid use and professionals.

Indexed as

behavioural scienceco-designhealth literacyhuman-computer interactionimplementation sciencenaloxoneopioids

Identifiers

PMID40718503
PMCPMC12291169

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.