Data on drug overdose death rates, by drug type and selected population characteristics. Please refer to the PDF or Excel version of this table in the HUS 2019 Data Finder (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus/contents2019.htm) for critical information about measures, definitions, and changes over time. SOURCE: NCHS, National Vital Statistics System, numerator data from annual public-use Mortality Files; denominator data from U.S. Census Bureau national population estimates; and Murphy SL, Xu JQ, Kochanek KD, Arias E, Tejada-Vera B. Deaths: Final data for 2018. National Vital Statistics Reports; vol 69 no 13. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.2021. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/nvsr.htm. For more information on the National Vital Statistics System, see the corresponding Appendix entry at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus19-appendix-508.pdf.

This dataset describes drug poisoning deaths at the U.S. and state level by selected demographic characteristics, and includes age-adjusted death rates for drug poisoning. Deaths are classified using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD–10). Drug-poisoning deaths are defined as having ICD–10 underlying cause-of-death codes X40–X44 (unintentional), X60–X64 (suicide), X85 (homicide), or Y10–Y14 (undetermined intent). Estimates are based on the National Vital Statistics System multiple cause-of-death mortality files (1). Age-adjusted death rates (deaths per 100,000 U.S. standard population for 2000) are calculated using the direct method. Populations used for computing death rates for 2011–2017 are postcensal estimates based on the 2010 U.S. census. Rates for census years are based on populations enumerated in the corresponding censuses. Rates for noncensus years before 2010 are revised using updated intercensal population estimates and may differ from rates previously published. Death rates for some states and years may be low due to a high number of unresolved pending cases or misclassification of ICD–10 codes for unintentional poisoning as R99, “Other ill-defined and unspecified causes of mortality” (2). For example, this issue is known to affect New Jersey in 2009 and West Virginia in 2005 and 2009 but also may affect other years and other states. Drug poisoning death rates may be underestimated in those instances. REFERENCES 1. National Center for Health Statistics. National Vital Statistics System: Mortality data. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm. CDC. CDC Wonder: Underlying cause of death 1999–2016. Available from: http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/ucd.html.

A. SUMMARY This dataset includes data on a variety of substance use services funded by the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH). This dataset only includes Drug MediCal-certified residential treatment, withdrawal management, and methadone treatment. Other private non-Drug Medi-Cal treatment providers may operate in the city. Withdrawal management discharges are inclusive of anyone who left withdrawal management after admission and may include someone who left before completing withdrawal management.

This dataset also includes naloxone distribution from the SFDPH Behavioral Health Services Naloxone Clearinghouse and the SFDPH-funded Drug Overdose Prevention and Education program. Both programs distribute naloxone to various community-based organizations who then distribute naloxone to their program participants. Programs may also receive naloxone from other sources. Data from these other sources is not included in this dataset.

Finally, this dataset includes the number of clients on medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

The number of people who were treated with methadone at a Drug Medi-Cal certified Opioid Treatment Program (OTP) by year is populated by the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) Behavioral Health Services Quality Management (BHSQM) program. OTPs in San Francisco are required to submit patient billing data in an electronic medical record system called Avatar. BHSQM calculates the number of people who received methadone annually based on Avatar data. Data only from Drug MediCal certified OTPs were included in this dataset.

The number of people who receive buprenorphine by year is populated from the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES), administered by the California Department of Justice. All licensed prescribers in California are required to document controlled substance prescriptions in CURES. The Center on Substance Use and Health calculates the total number of people who received a buprenorphine prescription annually based on CURES data. Formulations of buprenorphine that are prescribed only for pain management are excluded.

People may receive buprenorphine and methadone in the same year, so you cannot add the Buprenorphine Clients by Year, and Methadone Clients by Year data together to get the total number of unique people receiving medications for opioid use disorder.

For more information on where to find treatment in San Francisco, visit findtreatment-sf.org. 

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED This dataset is created by copying the data into this dataset from the SFDPH Behavioral Health Services Quality Management Program, the California Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES), and the Office of Overdose Prevention.

C. UPDATE PROCESS Residential Substance Use Treatment, Withdrawal Management, Methadone, and Naloxone data are updated quarterly with a 45-day delay. Buprenorphine data are updated quarterly and when the state makes this data available, usually at a 5-month delay.

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Throughout the year this dataset may include partial year data for methadone and buprenorphine treatment. As both methadone and buprenorphine are used as long-term treatments for opioid use disorder, many people on treatment at the end of one calendar year will continue into the next. For this reason, doubling (methadone), or quadrupling (buprenorphine) partial year data will not accurately project year-end totals.

E. RELATED DATASETS Overdose-Related 911 Responses by Emergency Medical Services Unintentional Overdose Death Rates by Race/Ethnicity Preliminary Unintentional Drug Overdose Deaths

F. CHANGE LOG

• 09/15/2025 - Data processing updated to capture new buprenorphine formulations.

Context

RxNorm is a name of a US-specific terminology in medicine that contains all medications available on US market. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RxNorm

RxNorm provides normalized names for clinical drugs and links its names to many of the drug vocabularies commonly used in pharmacy management and drug interaction software, including those of First Databank, Micromedex, Gold Standard Drug Database, and Multum. By providing links between these vocabularies, RxNorm can mediate messages between systems not using the same software and vocabulary. Source: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/rxnorm/

Content

RxNorm was created by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) to provide a normalized naming system for clinical drugs, defined as the combination of {ingredient + strength + dose form}. In addition to the naming system, the RxNorm dataset also provides structured information such as brand names, ingredients, drug classes, and so on, for each clinical drug. Typical uses of RxNorm include navigating between names and codes among different drug vocabularies and using information in RxNorm to assist with health information exchange/medication reconciliation, e-prescribing, drug analytics, formulary development, and other functions.

This public dataset includes multiple data files originally released in RxNorm Rich Release Format (RXNRRF) that are loaded into Bigquery tables. The data is updated and archived on a monthly basis.

The following tables are included in the RxNorm dataset:

• RXNCONSO contains concept and source information

• RXNREL contains information regarding relationships between entities

• RXNSAT contains attribute information

• RXNSTY contains semantic information

• RXNSAB contains source info

• RXNCUI contains retired rxcui codes

• RXNATOMARCHIVE contains archived data

• RXNCUICHANGES contains concept changes

Update Frequency: Monthly

Fork this kernel to get started with this dataset.

Acknowledgements

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/rxnorm/

https://bigquery.cloud.google.com/dataset/bigquery-public-data:nlm_rxnorm

https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/public-data/rxnorm

Dataset Source: Unified Medical Language System RxNorm. The dataset is provided "AS IS" without any warranty, express or implied, from Google. Google disclaims all liability for any damages, direct or indirect, resulting from the use of the dataset. This dataset uses publicly available data from the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services; NLM is not responsible for the dataset, does not endorse or recommend this or any other dataset.

Banner Photo by @freestocks from Unsplash.

Inspiration

What are the RXCUI codes for the ingredients of a list of drugs?

Which ingredients have the most variety of dose forms?

In what dose forms is the drug phenylephrine found?

What are the ingredients of the drug labeled with the generic code number 072718?

The PATH Study was launched in 2011 to inform the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory activities under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA). The PATH Study is a collaboration between the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The study sampled over 150,000 mailing addresses across the United States to create a national sample of people who use or do not use tobacco. 45,971 adults and youth constitute the first (baseline) wave, Wave 1, of data collected by this longitudinal cohort study. These 45,971 adults and 9 to 11 sampled at Wave 1) make up the 53,178 participants that constitute the Wave 1 Cohort. Respondents are asked to complete an interview at each follow-up wave. Youth who turn 18 by the current wave of data collection are considered "aged-up adults" and are invited to complete the Adult Interview. Additionally, "shadow youth" are considered "aged-up youth" upon turning 12 years old, when they are asked to complete an interview after parental consent. At Wave 4, a probability sample of 14,098 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 10 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 4. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 in the same sampled primary sampling units (PSU)s and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 4 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 1 Cohort who were in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 4. This combined set of Wave 4 participants, 52,731 participants in total, forms the Wave 4 Cohort. At Wave 7, a probability sample of 14,863 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 9 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 7. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 or Wave 4 in the same sampled PSUs and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "second replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with the Wave 7 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 4 Cohorts who were at least age 15 and in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 7 participants, 46,169 participants in total, forms the Wave 7 Cohort. Please refer to the Restricted-Use Files User Guide that provides further details about children designated as "shadow youth" and the formation of the Wave 1, Wave 4, and Wave 7 Cohorts. Wave 4.5 was a special data collection for youth only who were aged 12 to 17 at the time of the Wave 4.5 interview. Wave 4.5 was the fourth annual follow-up wave for those who were members of the Wave 1 Cohort. For those who were sampled at Wave 4, Wave 4.5 was the first annual follow-up wave. Wave 5.5, conducted in 2020, was a special data collection for Wave 4 Cohort youth and young adults ages 13 to 19 at the time of the Wave 5.5 interview. Also in 2020, a subsample of Wave 4 Cohort adults ages 20 and older were interviewed via the PATH Study Adult Telephone Survey (PATH-ATS). Wave 7.5 was a special collection for Wave 4 and Wave 7 Cohort youth and young adults ages 12 to 22 at the time of the Wave 7.5 interview. For those who were sampled at Wave 7, Wave 7.5 was the first annual follow-up wave. Dataset 1002 (DS1002) contains the data from the Wave 4.5 Youth and Parent Questionnaire. This file contains 1,617 variables and 13,131 cases. Of these cases, 11,378 are continuing youth having completed a prior Youth Interview. The other 1,753 cases are "aged-up youth" having previously been sampled as "shadow youth" Datasets 1112, 1212, and 1222, (DS1112, DS1212, and DS1222) are data files comprising the weight variables for Wave 4.5. The "all-waves" weight file contains weights for participants in the Wave 1 Cohort who completed a Wave 4.5 Youth Interview and completed interviews (if old enough to do so) or verified their information with the study (if not old enough to be interviewed) in Waves 1, 2, 3, and 4. There are two separate files with "single wave" weights: one for the Wave 1 Cohort and one for the Wave 4 Cohort. The "single-wave" weight file for the Wave 1 Cohort contains weights for youth who c

Rank, number of deaths, percentage of deaths, and age-specific mortality rates for the leading causes of death, by age group and sex, 2000 to most recent year.

BackgroundDrug overdose causes approximately 183,000 deaths worldwide annually and 50,000 deaths in Canada and the United States combined. Drug-related deaths are concentrated among young people, leading to a substantial burden of disease and loss of potential life years. Understanding the epidemiology, patterns of care, and prognosis of drug-related prehospital emergencies may lead to improved outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests with drug-related and presumed cardiac causes between 2007 and 2013 using the Toronto Regional RescuNet Epistry database. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. We computed standardized case fatality rates, and odds ratios of survival to hospital discharge for cardiac arrests with drug-related versus presumed cardiac causes, adjusting for confounders using logistic regression.ResultsThe analysis involved 21,497 cardiac arrests, including 378 (1.8%) drug-related and 21,119 (98.2%) presumed cardiac. Compared with the presumed cardiac group, drug-related arrest patients were younger and less likely to receive bystander resuscitation, have initial shockable cardiac rhythms, or be transported to hospital. There were no significant differences in emergency medical service response times, return of spontaneous circulation, or survival to discharge. Standardized case fatality rates confirmed that these effects were not due to age or sex differences. Adjusting for known predictors of survival, drug-related cardiac arrest was associated with increased odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR1.44, 95%CI 1.15–1.81).InterpretationIn out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, patients with drug-related causes are less likely than those with presumed cardiac causes to receive bystander resuscitation or have an initial shockable rhythm, but are more likely to survive after accounting for predictors of survival. The demographics and outcomes among drug-related cardiac arrest patients offers unique opportunities for prehospital intervention.

This data comes from the US Department of Justices National Clandestine Laboratory Register that is maintaned by the Drug Enforcement Agency. It can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/seizures/index.html. The data set was created by taking the street addresses of meth labs that had been busted by the DEA then geocoding them. The street data was not particularly clean and we could only get a 67% match on addresses so this is only a sample of the data. The data does provide a fascinating look at where drug production activity occurs at a very local level.

The PATH Study was launched in 2011 to inform the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory activities under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA). The PATH Study is a collaboration between the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For Wave 1 (baseline), the study sampled over 150,000 mailing addresses across the United States to create a national sample of people who do and do not use tobacco. 45,971 adults and youth constitute the first (baseline) wave, Wave 1, of data collected by this longitudinal cohort study. These 45,971 adults and youth along with 7,207 "shadow youth" (youth ages 9 to 11 sampled at Wave 1) make up the 53,178 participants that constitute the Wave 1 Cohort. Respondents are asked to complete an interview at each follow-up wave. Youth who turn 18 by the current wave of data collection are considered "aged-up adults" and are invited to complete the Adult Interview. Additionally, "shadow youth" are considered "aged-up youth" upon turning 12 years old, when they are asked to complete the Youth Interview after parental consent. At Wave 4, a probability sample of 14,098 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 10 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 4. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 in the same sampled Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 4 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 1 Cohort who were in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 4. This combined set of Wave 4 participants, 52,731 participants in total, forms the Wave 4 Cohort. At Wave 7, a probability sample of 14,863 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 9 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 7. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 or Wave 4 in the same sampled PSUs and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This second replenishment sample was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 7 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 4 Cohort who were at least age 15 and in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 7. This combined set of Wave 7 participants, 46,169 participants in total, forms the Wave 7 Cohort. Please refer to the Restricted-Use Files User Guide that provides further details about children designated as "shadow youth" and the formation of the Wave 1, Wave 4, and Wave 7 Cohorts. Dataset 0001 (DS0001) contains the data from the Public-Use File Master Linkage File (PUF-MLF). This file contains 93 variables and 82,139 cases. The file provides a master list of every person's unique identification number and what type of respondent they were in each wave for data that are available in the Public-Use Files and Special Collection Public-Use Files. Dataset 0002 (DS0002) contains the data from the Restricted-Use File Master Linkage File (RUF-MLF). This file contains 202 variables and 82,139 cases. The file provides a master list of every person's unique identification number and what type of respondent they were in each wave for data that are available in the Restricted-Use Files, Special Collection Restricted-Use Files, and Biomarker Restricted-Use Files.

The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study began originally surveying 45,971 adult and youth respondents. The PATH Study was launched in 2011 to inform Food and Drug Administration's regulatory activities under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA). The PATH Study is a collaboration between the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The study sampled over 150,000 mailing addresses across the United States to create a national sample of people who use or do not use tobacco. 45,971 adults and youth constitute the first (baseline) wave of data collected by this longitudinal cohort study. These 45,971 adults and youth along with 7,207 "shadow youth" (youth ages 9 to 11 sampled at Wave 1) make up the 53,178 participants that constitute the Wave 1 Cohort. Respondents are asked to complete an interview at each follow-up wave. Youth who turn 18 by the current wave of data collection are considered "aged-up adults" and are invited to complete the Adult Interview. Additionally, "shadow youth" are considered "aged-up youth" upon turning 12 years old, when they are asked to complete an interview after parental consent. At Wave 4, a probability sample of 14,098 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 10 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 4. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 in the same sampled Primary Sampling Unit (PSU)s and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 4 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 1 Cohort who were in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 4. This combined set of Wave 4 participants, 52,731 participants in total, forms the Wave 4 Cohort.Dataset 0001 (DS0001) contains the data from the Master Linkage file. This file contains 14 variables and 67,276 cases. The file provides a master list of every person's unique identification number and what type of respondent they were for each wave. At Wave 7, a probability sample of 14,863 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 9 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 7. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 or Wave 4 in the same sampled PSUs and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This second replenishment sample was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 7 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 4 Cohort who were at least age 15 and in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population at the time of Wave 7. This combined set of Wave 7 participants, 46,169 participants in total, forms the Wave 7 Cohort. Please refer to the Public-Use Files User Guide that provides further details about children designated as "shadow youth" and the formation of the Wave 1, Wave 4, and Wave 7 Cohorts.Dataset 1001 (DS1001) contains the data from the Wave 1 Adult Questionnaire. This data file contains 1,732 variables and 32,320 cases. Each of the cases represents a single, completed interview. Dataset 1002 (DS1002) contains the data from the Youth and Parent Questionnaire. This file contains 1,228 variables and 13,651 cases.Dataset 2001 (DS2001) contains the data from the Wave 2 Adult Questionnaire. This data file contains 2,197 variables and 28,362 cases. Of these cases, 26,447 also completed a Wave 1 Adult Questionnaire. The other 1,915 cases are "aged-up adults" having previously completed a Wave 1 Youth Questionnaire. Dataset 2002 (DS2002) contains the data from the Wave 2 Youth and Parent Questionnaire. This data file contains 1,389 variables and 12,172 cases. Of these cases, 10,081 also completed a Wave 1 Youth Questionnaire. The other 2,091 cases are "aged-up youth" having previously been sampled as "shadow youth." Dataset 3001 (DS3001) contains the data from the Wave 3 Adult Questionnaire. This data file contains 2,139 variables and 28,148 cases. Of these cases, 26,241 are continuing adults having completed a prior Adult Questionnaire. The other 1,907 cases are "aged-up adults" having previously completed a Youth Questionnaire. Dataset 3002 (DS3002) contains the data from t

Over 50,000 people die annually from opioid overdoses in the United States leading to what has become known as the “opioid epidemic.” This is of heightened concern in states like Alabama that experience higher rates of overall drug use and overdose deaths. Thus, it is increasingly important for college students in Alabama to learn about how the opioid epidemic is affecting their communities. Previous studies have demonstrated that engaging non-majors in innovative active-learning oriented pedagogies like service-learning can enhance their understanding and awareness about contemporary societal issues. Despite its pedagogical potential, the impact of opioid-related service-learning, particularly for non-majors, continues to remain unexplored. In this study, we describe the implementation of a service-learning module centered on opioid addiction. Students in a non-major biology course learned the science behind opioids, had Naloxone training, and engaged in active discussions with an opioid researcher, physician, and former illicit opioid user. Our assessment of the thematic analysis of pre- and post-reflection free-write data from 87 consenting students revealed 10 categories that students reported in the post- but not pre-reflections (essay gain), pre- and post-reflections (neutral), and pre- but not post-reflections (essay loss). We found essay gains in students humanizing addiction and awareness of the cultural context of opioid addiction and essay losses from students indicating that non-major students had a low level of awareness related to these issues. Eight one-on-one, semi-structured interviews revealed that students were personally impacted by the epidemic and valued its curricular inclusion. Our data supports that service-learning can increase non-major biology student’s awareness and contextual understanding about the opioid epidemic, enabling much-needed advocacy to further enhance its awareness among the public.

This national report summarizes findings from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) on trends in the behavioral health of people aged 12 years old or older in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population of the United States. It details the rates and numbers of use of illicit drugs (e.g., marijuana, cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, and misuse of prescription-type pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives), alcohol, and tobacco products; rates and number of substance use disorders (SUDs); and rates and numbers of persons with any mental illness (AMI), serious mental illness (SMI), and major depressive episode (MDE). Results are provided by age subgroups. Substance use trends are presented for 2002 to 2015, while trends for most mental health issues are reported for 2008 to 2015. Other topics included in the 2015 NSDUH are being published separately as data reviews. These data reviews cover national trends in suicidal thoughts and behavior among adults, substance use treatment, mental health service use, initiation of substance use, and substance use risk and protective factors.

THE USE OF DRUGS AND GETTING CAUGHT IS AN OLD ONE. Catch this new dataset to get some knowledge of the world's greatest drug seizues. The dataset has 7 columns all categorized by their region. Try dataset to salute the world's various drug enforcement departments.

IntroductionInjecting methamphetamine poses significant health risks, but little is known about how methamphetamine injectors filter their injection preparations and experience related health concerns.MethodsA chain-referral sample of Indigenous people who inject methamphetamine (n = 30) was recruited and semistructured interviews were conducted to collect information on filtration practices and health concerns.ResultsFiltration of the injection preparation was described by 53% of injectors. Elevated levels of concern for kidney disease, cancer and heart disease were observed among those who filtered their preparations (ranging from 50 to 56.3%). Concern about liver disease was the most frequent concern among those who filtered their preparations (62.5%) and was elevated in comparison to those who did not use filters (7.1%). Grouped logistic regression revealed a positive association between filtration of the injection preparation and overall health concerns expressed by injectors, after adjusting for gender and age. The marginal posterior distribution of the adjusted odds ratio for filtration of the injection preparation had a posterior median = 35.7, and 95% HPD interval = (5.1, 512.4).DiscussionResults illustrate a positive relationship between filtration of the injection preparation and health concerns among Indigenous people who inject methamphetamine. This likely reflects the use of filtration to reduce harms, and further research is needed to understand the full scope of prevention that may be associated with filtration of methamphetamine injection preparations.

This national report summarizes key findings from the 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) for indicators of substance use and mental health among people aged 12 years old or older in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population of the United States. Estimates include tobacco use, alcohol use, illicit drug use, opioid use, substance use disorders, major depressive episode, any mental illness, serious mental illness, suicide, co-occurring disorders, and receipt of treatment or services.

What is the Dataset About?🤷🏼‍♂️

The dataset is useful for training a Generative Language Model for the Medical application and instruction purposes, the dataset consists of various thoughs proposed by the people [mentioned as the Human ] and there responses including Medical Terminologies not limited to but including names of the drugs, prescriptions, yogic exercise suggessions, breathing exercise suggessions and few natural home made prescriptions.

  How the Dataset… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Mohammed-Altaf/medical-instruction-120k.

Three crime data sources were collected and merged for this study. All three crime sources were either only reporting on the U.S. state of Kentucky (KOOL and Louisville Open Data), or filtered to only contain results for the U.S. state of Kentucky (FBI). Each data source contains unique features such as crime classifications, and unique challenges in collection and cleaning.

The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issues a variety of query-able crime related data on their website. This data is sourced from law enforcement agencies across the U.S. as part of their National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and its standards. The goal of gathering, standardizing, and providing this information is to facilitate research into crime and law enforcement patterns. The information is provided as a collection of CSV files with instructions and code for importing into a SQL database. For the purposes of this research, we utilized the the crime databases for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019, containing a total of 1,939,990 unique incidents. The NIBRS_code property denotes the type of crime as assigned by the reporting agency. The human trafficking codes are 40A (Prostitution), 40B (Assisting or Promoting Prostitution), and 370 (Pornography/Obscene Material). The drug incidents were found using codes 35A (Drug/Narcotic Violations) and 35B (Drug Equipment Violations).

The Kentucky Department of Corrections, as a service to the public, provides an online lookup of people currently in its custody called Kentucky Offender Online Lookup (KOOL). This web application offers users tools to search for sets of inmates based on features such as name, crime date, crime name, race, and gender. The data that KOOL searches contains only people who are currently under supervision of the state of Kentucky (or should be under supervision in the case of escape).

The Louisville Open Data Initiative (LOD) is a program from the city of Louisville, Kentucky, U.S.A. to increase the transparency of the city government and promote technological innovation. As part of LOD, a dataset of crime reports is made available online. The records contained within the LOD dataset represent any call for police service where a police incident report was generated. This does not necessarily mean a crime was committed, as an incident report can be generated before an investigation has taken place.

This is a link to the United States Federal Government's Open Data Portal. Here you will find data, tools, and resources to conduct research, develop web and mobile applications, design data visualizations.

Check out the attachment in the metadata detailing all the Opioid Related datasets contained in this portal.

Data.gov is the federal government’s open data site, and aims to make government more open and accountable. Opening government data increases citizen participation in government, creates opportunities for economic development, and informs decision making in both the private and public sectors.

Links included for Center for Disease Control and Prevention both the business website and their Data and Statistics website.

This survey charted the gambling, social media usage and subjective well-being of young people aged 15-25 years in the United States. The study was conducted as part of the "Problem Gambling and Social Media: Social Psychological Study on Youth Behaviour in Online Gaming Communities" research project. The aim of the project was to analyse how young social media users evaluate, adopt and share gambling-related online content and how online group processes affect their gambling and gambling-related attitudes. FSD's holdings also include two other datasets that were collected using a nearly identical questionnaire (FSD3399 and FSD3400). Data for the research project have been collected in Finland, the United States, Spain, and South Korea. First, the respondents were asked which social media services they used (e.g. Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, discussion forums, online casinos) and how often. Topics that the respondents discussed on gambling-related social media were charted more closely, and they were asked, for example, whether the discussion usually related to instructions or tips on gambling or to problem gambling and recovering from problem gambling. Some questions on the respondents' social media activity were also presented, for instance, how often they saw gambling-related advertising online, how often they changed their most important social media passwords, and how often they uploaded pictures of themselves on social media. The respondents were asked whether they had ever been harassed online or had been the victim of a crime on the Internet in the past three years (e.g. defamation, identity theft, fraud, sexual harassment). The respondents' identity bubbles on social media were surveyed by using the IBR scale (Identity Bubble Reinforcement Scale). The respondents were asked, for instance, whether they thought they could be themselves on social media and whether they only interacted with people similar to them on social media. Additionally, the CIUS scale (Compulsive Internet Use) was used to examine problems related to Internet use. Questions focused on, for example, whether the respondents found it difficult to stop using the Internet when they were online, whether people close to them said they should use the Internet less, and whether they felt restless, frustrated or irritated when they couldn't use the Internet. In the next section of the questionnaire, the respondents were randomly assigned to two groups for a vignette experiment. Respondents in the test group were told they belong to Group C because they had answered the earlier questions in a similar manner to others in the group. Those in the control group were given no information on the group. The respondents were presented with different gambling-related social media scenarios, and they were asked to evaluate the contents of the gambling-related messages by "liking" or "disliking" the message or by not reacting to it at all. Each respondent was shown four different gambling messages with different contents. Three factors were manipulated in the scenarios (2x2x2 design): expressed stance of the message on gambling (positive or negative), narrative perspective of the message (experience-driven first-person narration or fact-driven third-person narration) and majority opinion of other respondents on the message (positively or negatively biased distribution of likes or dislikes). For Group C, the majority opinion was seemingly provided by other Group C members, whereas for the control group the majority opinion was seemingly provided by other respondents. Additionally, the respondents' attitudes towards the message were surveyed with statements regarding, for instance, how likely they would find the message interesting or share it on social media. Next, the respondents' attitudes towards gambling were charted by using the ATGS scale (Attitudes Towards Gambling Scale). They were asked, for example, whether people should have the right to gamble whenever they want, whether most people who gamble do so sensibly and whether it would be better if gambling was banned altogether. The respondents' gambling habits were examined by using the SOGS scale (South Oaks Gambling Screen), and they were asked, for instance, which types of gambling they had done in the past 12 months (played slot machines, visited an online casino, bet on lotteries etc.), whether the people close to them had gambling problems, and whether they had borrowed money to gamble or to pay gambling debts. In addition, the respondents' alcohol consumption was surveyed with a few questions from the AUDITC scale (The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test), and they were asked whether they had used various drugs for recreational purposes (e.g. cannabis, LSD, amphetamine, opioids) and which online resources they had used to purchases these drugs (e.g. Facebook, Instagram, Craigslist). The respondents' subjective well-being and social relationships were examined next. The respondents were asked how happy they were in general and how satisfied they were with their economic situation and life in general. They were also asked how well the single statement "I have high self-esteem" from the SISE scale (Single-item Self-esteem Scale) described them. The three statements on lacking companionship, feeling left out and feeling isolated from the LONE scale (Three-item Loneliness Scale) were also included in the survey. Feelings of belonging to different groups or communities (e.g. family, friends, neighbourhood, parish/religious community) were charted, and the 12-item GHQ scale (General Health Questionnaire) was used to survey the respondents' recent mental health. Questions included, for example, whether the respondents had been able to concentrate on what they were doing, had felt they couldn't overcome their difficulties, and had been losing confidence in themselves. Finally, the respondents' sense of control over the events in their lives was examined with the MASTERY scale (Sense of Mastery Scale), with questions focusing on, for instance, whether they thought they had little control over the things that happen to them and whether they often felt helpless in dealing with the problems of life. The respondents' impulsivity was surveyed by using the EIS scale (Eysenck Impulsivity Scale) and their willingness to delay gratification was surveyed with the GRATIF scale (Delay of Gratification). Background variables included the respondent's gender, age, country of birth (own and parents') level of education, type of municipality of residence, household composition, disposable income, possible financial problems, and economic activity and occupational status.

Background: Piper methysticum, commonly called kava, has long been consumed in beverage form in the Pacific Islands. Kava use in the US has slowly increased since the 1990s, but is not assessed in major epidemiological surveys. Objectives: To analyze social-media posts about kava from current, past, and prospective users, for motivations, patterns of co-use, and effects. Methods: Text from Reddit posts, and accompanying metadata, were collected and thematically coded by two independent raters. Results: 423 posts were collected, spanning January 2006 through December 2021. Of the 1,211 thematic codes applied, 1,098 (90. 7%) were concordant. Motivations for use bifurcated into self-treatment (for psychiatric or physical health conditions) and recreation; these were not mutually exclusive. Kava was rarely considered strongly euphoriant, but was valued as an anxiolytic. Kava was frequently used with other substances, most commonly kratom. Kava was used at lower doses for self-treatment than for other purposes (pseudo-R2 = 0.11). Undesirable effects (gastrointestinal upset, fatigue) were mentioned, though less often than benefits. Hepatotoxicity, reported elsewhere as a rare, non-dose-related risk, was disputed on the basis of its not having been experienced by those posting. Conclusion: Kava appears to be conceptualized among Reddit posters as an anxiolytic with few risks or adverse effects. As it grows in popularity, especially among people who use other drugs that are more liable to misuse or addiction, it should be assessed in probability samples (i.e. in the major national drug surveys) and clinical practice for its risks, potential benefits, and possible drug-drug interactions.