For those interested in data on student drug addiction in 2024, several sources offer valuable datasets and statistics.

1. Kaggle Dataset: Kaggle hosts a specific dataset on student drug addiction. This dataset includes various attributes related to student demographics, substance use patterns, and associated behavioral factors. It's a useful resource for data analysis and machine learning projects focused on understanding drug addiction among students【5†source】.

2. National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH): This comprehensive survey provides detailed annual data on substance use and mental health across the United States, including among students. It covers a wide range of substances and demographic details, helping to track trends and the need for treatment services【6†source】【8†source】.

3. Monitoring the Future (MTF) Survey: Conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), this survey tracks drug and alcohol use and attitudes among American adolescents. It provides annual updates and is an excellent source for understanding trends in substance use among high school and college students【7†source】.

4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW): For those interested in a more global perspective, the AIHW offers data from the National Drug Strategy Household Survey, which includes information on youth and young adult drug use in Australia. This can be useful for comparative studies【10†source】.

For detailed datasets and further analysis, you can explore these resources directly:

• Kaggle Student Drugs Addiction Dataset
• NSDUH Data
• Monitoring the Future
• AIHW Drug Survey

Abstract (en): The Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) is a nationally representative public health surveillance system that has monitored drug related emergency department (ED) visits to hospitals since the early 1970s. First administered by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the responsibility for DAWN now rests with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality (CBHSQ). Over the years, the exact survey methodology has been adjusted to improve the quality, reliability, and generalizability of the information produced by DAWN. The current approach was first fully implemented in the 2004 data collection year. DAWN relies on a longitudinal probability sample of hospitals located throughout the United States. To be eligible for selection into the DAWN sample, a hospital must be a non-Federal, short-stay, general surgical and medical hospital located in the United States, with at least one 24-hour ED. DAWN cases are identified by the systematic review of ED medical records in participating hospitals. The unit of analysis is any ED visit involving recent drug use. DAWN captures both ED visits that are directly caused by drugs and those in which drugs are a contributing factor but not the direct cause of the ED visit. The reason a patient used a drug is not part of the criteria for considering a visit to be drug-related. Therefore, all types of drug-related events are included: drug misuse or abuse, accidental drug ingestion, drug-related suicide attempts, malicious drug poisonings, and adverse reactions. DAWN does not report medications that are unrelated to the visit. The DAWN public-use dataset provides information for all types of drugs, including illegal drugs, prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, dietary supplements, anesthetic gases, substances that have psychoactive effects when inhaled, alcohol when used in combination with other drugs (all ages), and alcohol alone (only for patients aged 20 or younger). Public-use dataset variables describe and categorize up to 22 drugs contributing to the ED visit, including toxicology confirmation and route of administration. Administrative variables specify the type of case, case disposition, categorized episode time of day, and quarter of year. Metropolitan area is included for represented metropolitan areas. Created variables include the number of unique drugs reported and case-level indicators for alcohol, non-alcohol illicit substances, any pharmaceutical, non-medical use of pharmaceuticals, and all misuse and abuse of drugs. Demographic items include age category, sex, and race/ethnicity. Complex sample design and weighting variables are included to calculate various estimates of drug-related ED visits for the Nation as a whole, as well as for specific metropolitan areas, from the ED visits classified as DAWN cases in the selected hospitals. DAWN includes a set of complex sample design variables to calculate estimates for the entire universe of DAWN-eligible hospitals in the United States from the sampled hospitals participating in DAWN. The primary sampling weights reflect the probability of selection, and separate adjustment factors are included to account for sampling of ED visits, nonresponse, data quality, and the known total of ED visits delivered by the universe of eligible hospitals. DAWN design variables include: variance estimation stratum (STRATA), PSU, replicate (REPLICATE), PSU frame count (PSUFRAME), and case weight (CASEWGT). ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Created variable labels and/or value labels.; Standardized missing values.; Created online analysis version with question text.; Performed recodes and/or calculated derived variables.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Response Rates: For 2009, 242 hospitals submitted data that were used for estimation. The overall weighted response rate was 31.8 percent. For the 12 oversampled metropolitan areas and divisions, the individual response rates ranged from 28.5 percent in the Ho...

West Virginia is currently the state with the highest drug overdose death rate in the United States, with 91 deaths per 100,000 population in 2022. Although West Virginia had the highest drug overdose death rate at that time, California was the state where the most people died from drug overdose. In 2022, around 10,952 people in California died from a drug overdose. The main perpetrator Opioids account for the majority of all drug overdose deaths in the United States. Opioids include illegal drugs such as heroin, legal prescription drugs like oxycodone, and illicitly manufactured synthetic drugs like fentanyl. The abuse of opioids has increased in recent years, leading to an increased number of drug overdose deaths. The death rate from heroin overdose hit an all-time high of 4.9 per 100,000 population in 2016 and 2017, but has decreased in recent years. Now, illicitly manufactured synthetic opioids such as fentanyl account for the majority of opioid overdose deaths in the United States. Opioid epidemic The sharp rise in overdose deaths from opioids have led many to declare the United States is currently experiencing an opioid epidemic or opioid crisis. The causes of this epidemic are complicated but involve a combination of a rise in dispensed prescriptions, irresponsible marketing from pharmaceutical companies, a lack of physician-patient communication, increased social acceptance of prescription drugs, and an increased supply of cheap and potent heroin on the streets.

In 2023, around 27 percent of U.S. respondents in grades 8, 10, and 12 stated they had used any illicit drug within their lifetime. This survey shows the lifetime prevalence of illicit drug use for grades 8, 10, and 12 combined as of 2023, by drug.

Abstract (en): This series measures the prevalence and correlates of drug use in the United States. The surveys are designed to provide quarterly, as well as annual, estimates. Information is provided on the use of illicit drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs among members of United States households aged 12 and older. Questions include age at first use, as well as lifetime, annual, and past-month usage for the following drug classes: cannabis, cocaine, hallucinogens, heroin, alcohol, tobacco, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs, including psychotherapeutics. Respondents were also asked about problems resulting from their use of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, their perceptions of the risks involved, and personal and family income sources and amounts. Half of the respondents were asked questions regarding substance use by close friends. Demographic data include gender, race, age, ethnicity, educational level, job status, income level, veteran status, household composition, and population density. Youth respondents were also asked about time spent on homework and leisure activities. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Created online analysis version with question text.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Response Rates: The interview completion rates for the three age groups were: 84 percent for youth, 81 percent for young adults, and 77 percent for older adults. The civilian, noninstitutionalized population of the coterminous United States (Alaska and Hawaii excluded) aged 12 and older. Multistage area probability sample design involving five selection stages: (a) primary areas (e.g., counties), (b) subareas within primary areas (geographic area of approximately 2,500 population in 1970), (c) housing units within subareas, (d) age group domains within listed units, and (e) members of households within sampled age groups. The two race classifications were: White, and Black/other. The three age groups were: youth (age 12 to 17), young adult (age 18 to 34), and older adult (age 35 and older). Each age group was sampled separately, and the probability of selection decreased with the prospective respondent's age. One youth and/or one adult could be chosen per household. The basic national sample was supplemented by a sample of residents of rural areas. The overall interview completion rate was 81 percent. 2015-11-23 Covers for the PDF documentation were revised.2015-02-03 Created a separate Questionnaire PDF that was extracted from the Codebook PDF.2013-06-19 Updated variable-level ddi files released.2008-06-18 New files were added. These files included one or more of the following: Stata setup, SAS transport (CPORT), SPSS system, Stata system, SAS supplemental syntax, and Stata supplemental syntax files, and tab-delimited ASCII data file. Also added variable CASEID to the dataset.1999-05-12 SAS and SPSS data definition statements have been updated to include value labels and missing values sections. Funding insitution(s): United States Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. National Institute on Drug Abuse. personal interviews and self-enumerated answer sheets (drug use)Data were collected by Response Analysis Corporation, Princeton, NJ, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The data and codebook were prepared for release by Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC, and the codebook was initially distributed by National Opinion Research Center, Chicago, IL, under contracts with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.For selected variables, statistical imputation was done following logical imputation to replace missing responses. These variables are identified by the designation "IMPUTATION-REVISED" in the variable label, and the names of these variables begin with the letters "IR". For each imputation-revised variable there is a corresponding imputation indicator variable that indicates whether a case's value on the variable resulted from an interview response, logical imputation, or statistical imputation. The names of ...

In 2021, almost seven percent of users of injection drugs in North America were HIV-positive. This statistic shows the prevalence of HIV among injection drug users in 2021, sorted by WHO world sub-regions.

In 2021, there were around 237 thousand HIV-infected among people who injected drugs in North America. This statistic depicts the number of injection drug users who were HIV-positive in 2021, sorted by WHO world sub-regions.

Objectives: Define the role of increasing cannabis availability on population mental health (MH).

Methods. Ecological cohort study of National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) geographically-linked substate-shapefiles 2010-2012 and 2014-2016 supplemented by five-year US American Community Survey. Drugs: cigarettes, alcohol abuse, last-month cannabis use and last-year cocaine use. MH: any mental illness, major depressive illness, serious mental illness and suicidal thinking. Data analysis: two-stage and geotemporospatial methods in R.

Results: 410,138 NSDUH respondents. Average response rate 76.7%. When all drug exposure, ethnicity and income variables were combined in final geospatiotemporal models tobacco, alcohol cannabis exposure, and various ethnicities were significantly related to all four major mental health outcomes. Cannabis exposure alone was related to any mental illness (β-estimate= -3.315+0.374, P<2.2x10-16), major depressive episode (β-estimate= -3.712+0.454, P=3.0x10-16), serious mental illness (SMI, β-estimate= -3.063+0.504, P=1.2x10-9), suicidal ideation (β-estimate= -3.013+0.436, P=4.8x10-12) and with more significant interactions in each case (from β-estimate= 1.844+0.277, P=3.0x10-11). Geospatial modelling showed a monotonic upward trajectory of SMI which doubled (3.62% to 7.06%) as cannabis use increased. Extrapolated to whole populations cannabis decriminalization (4.35+0.05%, Prevalence Ratio (PR)=1.035(95%C.I. 1.034-1.036), attributable fraction in the exposed (AFE)=3.28%(3.18-3.37%), P<10-300) and legalization (4.66+0.09%, PR=1.155(1.153-1.158), AFE=12.91% (12.72-13.10%), P<10-300) were associated with increased SMI vs. illegal status (4.26+0.04%).

Conclusions: Data show all four indices of mental ill-health track cannabis exposure and are robust to multivariable adjustment for ethnicity, socioeconomics and other drug use. MH deteriorated with cannabis legalization. Together with similar international reports and numerous mechanistic studies preventative action to reduce cannabis use-exposure is indicated.

Snapshot img

Drugs Of Abuse Testing Market Size 2024-2028

The drugs of abuse testing market size is forecast to increase by USD 1.04 billion at a CAGR of 4.5% between 2023 and 2028. The market is experiencing significant growth, driven by increased strategic developments and the growing adoption of advanced information technology and information management solutions. These advancements in instruments enable efficient and accurate testing, reducing turnaround time and enhancing overall productivity. For instance, mass spectrometer and chromatography systems are extensively employed for the qualitative and quantitative analysis of cannabinoids in cannabis strains. However, high costs associated with the implementation and maintenance of these technologies remain a challenge for market expansion. Additionally, stringent regulations and the need for continuous innovation to keep up with emerging drugs of abuse are other key factors shaping the market landscape. Overall, the DoA testing market is expected to continue its growth trajectory, fueled by the need for workplace safety and substance abuse prevention.

What will be the Size of the Market During the Forecast Period?

Request Free Sample

The market is driven by the increasing prevalence of prescription drug abuse, psychostimulants, fentanyl, vaping, and illicit drugs, as well as alcohol. Substance use disorders continue to be a significant public health concern in the US. Forensic laboratories and hospitals are major end-users, diagnostics with epidemiologic investigations and addiction treatment centers also contribute. Vulnerable populations such as the elderly, those with chronic pain, LIMS software, and individuals with opioid medications are key focus areas. Drugs like Fentanyl, psychostimulants, and cannabis/marijuana are common targets for testing.

Moreover, fentanyl, a powerful opioid, has emerged as a significant threat in the market. Its illegally manufactured forms are often mixed with other substances, making it difficult to detect and leading to a high number of overdose deaths. The elderly population is another vulnerable group in the market. They are at a higher risk of substance use disorders due to chronic pain and the misuse of prescription medications. Drug use statistics indicate that psychostimulants, such as cocaine and amphetamines, continue to be popular among certain demographics. Vaping, a newer form of drug delivery, has also gained popularity, particularly among the younger population.

Furthermore, real-time surveillance and epidemiologic investigations play a crucial role in identifying drug-related activity and addressing vulnerabilities in the market. Public awareness campaigns and drug testing mandates are essential tools in preventing substance use disorders and promoting addiction treatment. Cannabis, or marijuana, is another substance of interest in the market. While it is legal for medicinal and recreational use in some states, it is still illegal in others, making testing a necessity for employers and law enforcement agencies. The market is expected to grow due to the increasing need for accurate and reliable testing services. This growth is driven by the rising number of overdose deaths, addiction treatment initiatives, and public awareness campaigns.

In conclusion, the market is a critical component in addressing substance use disorders and promoting public health. It encompasses various sectors, including forensic laboratories and hospitals, and offers testing services for a range of substances, including prescription drugs, illicit drugs, and alcohol. The market is driven by various factors, including the increasing prevalence of substance use disorders, the emergence of new drugs and drug delivery methods, and the need for accurate and reliable testing services.

Market Segmentation

The market research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD billion' for the period 2024-2028, as well as historical data from 2018-2022 for the following segments.

Product

  Instruments
  Consumables


Geography

  North America

    Canada
    US


  Europe

    Denmark


  Asia

    China
    India


  Rest of World (ROW)

By Product Insights

The instruments segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period. The market encompasses various systems, analyzers, and devices for detecting and quantifying different drug substances. These tools include breath analyzers, chromatography analyzers, immunoassay analyzers, urine testing devices, and oral fluid testing devices. For example, cannabis testing relies on mass spectrometers and chromatography systems to identify and measure the presence and quantity of cannabinoid compounds. Biotechnology plays a significant role in the market, as the principles of detection and quantification are similar to those used in foo

Abstract (en): This file includes data from the 2002 through 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) survey. The only variables included in the data file are ones that were collected in a comparable manner across all four years from 2002-2005, from 2006-2009, or from 2010-2013. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) series (formerly titled National Household Survey on Drug Abuse) primarily measures the prevalence and correlates of drug use in the United States. The surveys are designed to provide quarterly, as well as annual, estimates. Information is provided on the use of illicit drugs, alcohol, and tobacco among members of United States households aged 12 and older. Questions included age at first use as well as lifetime, annual, and past-month usage for the following drug classes: marijuana, cocaine (and crack), hallucinogens, heroin, inhalants, alcohol, tobacco, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs, including pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives. The survey covered substance abuse treatment history and perceived need for treatment. The survey included questions concerning treatment for both substance abuse and mental health-related disorders. Respondents were also asked about personal and family income sources and amounts, health care access and coverage, illegal activities and arrest record, problems resulting from the use of drugs, and needle-sharing. Certain questions are asked only of respondents aged 12 to 17. These "youth experiences" items covered a variety of topics, such as neighborhood environment, illegal activities, drug use by friends, social support, extracurricular activities, exposure to substance abuse prevention and education programs, and perceived adult attitudes toward drug use and activities such as school work. Also included are questions on mental health and access to care, perceived risk of using drugs, perceived availability of drugs, driving and personal behavior, and cigar smoking. Demographic information includes gender, race, age, ethnicity, marital status, educational level, job status, veteran status, and current household composition. In the income section, which was interviewer-administered, a split-sample study had been embedded within the 2006 and 2007 surveys to compare a shorter version of the income questions with a longer set of questions that had been used in previous surveys. This shorter version was adopted for the 2008 NSDUH and will be used for future NSDUHs. Only combined 4-year estimates for the years 2002-2005, 2006-2009, and 2010-2013 are possible with the available R-DAS analysis weight. All analyses done within the R-DAS automatically apply the weight variable. Unweighted analyses are not feasible through the R-DAS. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Standardized missing values.; Created online analysis version with question text.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Response Rates: Strategies for ensuring high rates of participation resulted in the following rates for each of the following years: 2013 weighted screening response rate of 83.9 percent and a weighted interview response rate for the CAI of 71.7 percent. 2012 weighted screening response rate of 86.1 percent and a weighted interview response rate for the CAI of 73.0 percent. 2011 weighted screening response rate of 87.0 percent and a weighted interview response rate for the CAI of 74.4 percent. 2010 weighted screening response rate of 88.4 percent and a weighted interview response rate for the CAI of 74.6 percent. 2009 weighted screening response rate of 88.4 percent and a weighted interview response rate for the CAI of 75.6 percent. For 2008 the response rates were 88.6 percent and 74.2 percent respectively For 2007 the response rates were 89.1 percent and 73.9 percent respectively For 2006 the response rates were 90.2 percent and 74.2 percent respectively For 2005 the response rates were 91.3 percent and 76.2 percent respectively For 2004 the response rates were 90.9 percent and 77.0 percent respectively For 2003 the response rates were 90.7 percent and 77.4 percent resp...

Abstract (en): The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) series (formerly titled National Household Survey on Drug Abuse) measures the prevalence and correlates of drug use in the United States. The surveys are designed to provide quarterly, as well as annual, estimates. Information is provided on the use of illicit drugs, alcohol, and tobacco among members of United States households aged 12 and older. Questions included age at first use as well as lifetime, annual, and past-month usage for the following drug classes: marijuana, cocaine (and crack), hallucinogens, heroin, inhalants, alcohol, tobacco, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs, including pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives. The survey covered substance abuse treatment history and perceived need for treatment, and included questions from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of Mental Disorders that allow diagnostic criteria to be applied. The survey included questions concerning treatment for both substance abuse and mental health related disorders. Respondents were also asked about personal and family income sources and amounts, health care access and coverage, illegal activities and arrest record, problems resulting from the use of drugs, and needle-sharing. Questions introduced in previous administrations were retained in the 2004 survey, including questions asked only of respondents aged 12 to 17. These "youth experiences" items covered a variety of topics, such as neighborhood environment, illegal activities, drug use by friends, social support, extracurricular activities, exposure to substance abuse prevention and education programs, and perceived adult attitudes toward drug use and activities such as school work. Several measures focused on prevention-related themes in this section. Also retained were questions on mental health and access to care, perceived risk of using drugs, perceived availability of drugs, driving and personal behavior, and cigar smoking. Questions on the tobacco brand used most often were introduced with the 1999 survey and retained through the 2003 survey. Background information includes gender, race, age, ethnicity, marital status, educational level, job status, veteran status, and current household composition. In addition, in 2004 Adult and Adolescent Mental Health modules were added. The "basic sampling weights" are equal to the inverse of the probabilities of selection of sample respondents. To obtain "final NSDUH weights," the basic weights were adjusted to take into account dwelling unit-level and individual-level nonresponse and then further adjusted to ensure consistency with intercensal population projections from the United States Bureau of the Census. In the 2004 NSDUH, a split-sample design for respondents aged 18 or older was implemented. Thus in 2004, two additional person-level analysis weights other than ANALWT_C were created. They are SPDWT_C and DEPWT_C. These weights were created for specific types of person-level analyses. Depending on the section(s) of the 2004 survey from which the variable(s) originated, one of the three sampling weights must be selected and applied. Please refer to the Processor Notes in the codebook for details on determining the appropriate weight to use when analyzing a specific variable or combination of variables. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Created online analysis version with question text.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Response Rates: The study yielded a weighted screening response rate of 91 percent and a weighted interview response rate for the Computer Assisted Interview (CAI) of 77 percent. The civilian, noninstitutionalized population of the United States aged 12 and older, including residents of noninstitutional group quarters such as college dormitories, group homes, shelters, rooming houses, and civilians dwelling on military installations. A multistage area probability sample for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia was used since 1999. The 2004 sample design is a continuation of the coordinated five-year sample design th...

As of 2021, men represented around 75 percent of opiate users worldwide, while 45 percent of amphetamine users globally were women. This statistic shows the distribution of illicit drug users worldwide as of 2021, by gender and drug.

In 2021/2022, the states with the highest share of people who had used cocaine in the past year were Colorado, Vermont, the District of Columbia, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. In Colorado, around 3.06 percent of the population were estimated to have used cocaine in the past year at that time, compared to the U.S. average of 1.95 percent. The states with the lowest past-year cocaine consumption rates were New Hampshire and Wyoming. Cocaine use in the United States As of 2022, cocaine was the second most used illicit drug in the United States, behind marijuana. At that time around 42.2 million people in the U.S. had used cocaine at least once in their lifetime. In comparison, around 29.5 million people reported using LSD in their lifetime and 22.1 million had used ecstasy. In 2022, almost 5.2 million people were estimated to have used cocaine in the past year. How many people in the U.S. die from cocaine every year? The number of drug poisoning deaths involving cocaine has increased significantly over the past couple decades. In 2021, there were around 24,486 overdose deaths involving cocaine, compared to just 3,800 in the year 1999. However, it is important to note that many overdose deaths involving cocaine also involve other drugs, namely opioids. The increase in overdose deaths involving cocaine is directly related to the ongoing opioid epidemic in the United States. Rates of overdose death involving cocaine are twice as high for men than women, but death rates for both men and women have increased in recent years.

Following more than 30 years of rising incarceration rates, the United States now imprisons a higher proportion of its population than any country in the world. Building on theories of representation and organized interest group behavior, this article argues that an increasingly punitive public has been a primary reason for this prolific expansion. To test this hypothesis, I generate a new over-time measure of the public’s support for being tough on crime. The analysis suggests that, controlling for the crime rate, illegal drug use, inequality, and the party in power, since 1953 public opinion has been a fundamental determinant of changes in the incarceration rate. If the public’s punitiveness had stopped rising in the mid-1970s, the results imply that there would have been approximately 20% fewer incarcerations. Additionally, an analysis of congressional attention to criminal justice issues supports the argument that the public’s attitudes have led, not followed, political elites.

These data provide information on the number of arrests reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program each year by police agencies in the United States. These arrest reports provide data on 43 offenses including violent crime, drug use, gambling, and larceny. The data received by ICPSR were structured as a hierarchical file containing (per reporting police agency) an agency header record, 1 to 12 monthly header records, and 1 to 43 detail offense records containing the counts of arrests by age, sex, and race for a particular offense. ICPSR restructured the original data to a rectangular format.

Overview

Opioids continue to remain a huge problem in many parts of the country. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently analyzed opioid prescribing patterns in U.S. counties. Researchers found that while the amount of opioids prescribed dropped 18.2 percent nationally from 2010 to 2015, there was enormous variance in prescribing patterns by county.

The amount of opioids prescribed nationally peaked at the equivalent of 782 milligrams of morphine annually per capita in 2010 and fell to 640 in 2015. That’s an improvement, but it’s still three times higher than it was in 1999, Dr. Anne Schuchat, the CDC's principal deputy director, told the AP earlier this month.

Nearly half of all counties saw a significant decrease in prescription amounts from 2010 to 2015, but another 22.6 percent saw an increase of at least 10 percent during that time. The CDC analysis found that in 2015, the highest-prescribing counties had per-capita prescription amounts that were six times that of the lowest-prescribing counties.

The CDC analysis also found certain demographic and health characteristics were linked to -- but did not fully account for -- higher prescribing amounts. Counties with high prescribing often had these factors in common:

• Larger percentages of non-Hispanic white residents
• A higher prevalence of diabetes and arthritis
• Higher rates of unemployment
• Higher rates of Medicaid enrollment
• Were micropolitan areas (defined as counties with fewer than 50,000 people but with an urban cluster of at least 10,000 people)

The results of the CDC's look at possible contributing factors can be found here: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6626a4.htm?s_cid=mm6626a4_w#T2_down

The CDC produced a county-level map of the per-capita data here: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6626a4.htm?s_cid=mm6626a4_w#F2_down

The CDC also looked at other factors -- including the rate of prescriptions written (which dropped 13.1 percent nationally from 2012-2015); the number of high-dosage prescriptions written (which dropped 41.4 percent from 2010-2015); and the average daily milligrams of morphine equivalent per prescription, which dropped from 58.0 in 2010 to 48.1 in 2015. The one factor that rose was days' supply per prescription, which went up from 15.5 days' worth of medication in 2010 to 17.7 days in 2015.

CDC researchers point out that despite prescription amounts for legal drugs declining in many places, opiate-related deaths have continued to rise. Opioid overdoses -- from both legal and illegal drugs -- kill 91 people each day in the U.S. In 2015, roughly 15,000 people died from prescription opiate-related overdoses, according to CDC data.

The CDC researchers described their findings in detail in this report: http://bit.ly/2vH3AUW The report and data analysis will be used as a baseline to determine whether the CDC's 2016 guidelines for opioid prescribing (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/rr/rr6501e1.htm#B1_down) have been effective, a CDC spokeswoman said.

About This Data

This data was obtained by the CDC from QuintilesIMS Transactional Data Warehouse, which provides estimates of the number of opioid prescriptions dispensed in the United States based on a sample of approximately 59,000 pharmacies, representing 88 percent of prescriptions in the United States.

Prescriptions can vary widely by drug, dosage, and days' supply. Instead of merely counting the number of prescriptions written or pills dispensed, the CDC normalized the data to arrive at a single unit of measurement of opioids per capita for each county. The prescription amounts are measured in "Morphine Milligram Equivalents," or MMEs.

MMEs are a medically accepted method of measuring all the opioids a patient might be ingesting, so as to prevent overdoses and reduce the risk of addiction. In 2016, the CDC published guidelines recommending that clinicians use caution when increasing dosages past 50 MME a day, and to avoid reaching 90 MME a day except in the most extreme cases. General information about opioid dosing can be found here: https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/pdf/calculating_total_daily_dose-a.pdf

The CDC placed each county into quartiles based on 2015 per-capita prescribing levels. In measuring change from 2010 to 2015, the CDC considered whether prescribing amounts had risen more than 10 percent ("Increased"), dropped more than 10 percent ("Decreased"), or stayed "Stable" (no change, or changes of less than 10 percent in either direction). These flags are included in the dataset.

The counties in the highest-prescribing quartile had an average of 1,319 MME per capita, while the counties in the lowest quartile had an average of 203 MME per capita.

Using This Data

According to the CDC's analysis, the national average daily MME per prescription in 2015 was 48.1. You can divide your county's annual per-capita MME by this number to find out the number of days' prescriptions per person in your county.

For Example: Surry County, N.C. has an annual 2015 per-capita MME of 2431.6. Divide that by 48.1 and you'll get 50.5.

This can be phrased as: "The prescription amounts in 2015 were the equivalent of a 50-day supply of opioids for every person in Surry County."

The CDC did similar calculations in a 2015 report, but instead of using the average daily MME prescription determined by this data, used as a basic guideline a 'typical' prescription of 5 mg of hydrocodone (5 MME) every 4 hours, for a total of 30 MME/day. Using this example, enough opioids were prescribed in Surry County, NC in 2015 to medicate every person in the county around the clock for 81 days.

You can also rank the counties in your state. To do this, click on "Rank Prescription Amounts in your state" under the 'Queries' tab in the upper right-hand bar on this page. Type the name of your state over the "STATE_NAME" placeholder text in the query. The resulting table will show you the counties in your state, ordered by 2015 MMEs. You can export this table. Keep in mind that the prescription data reflects where prescriptions were dispensed, not where recipients live.

Look for counties where prescription amounts have increased more than 10 percent since 2010. To do this, click on "Increasing prescription amounts" under the 'Queries' tab in the upper right-hand bar on this page. Type the name of your state over the "STATE_NAME". The resulting table will show you all the counties in your state that have seen prescription amounts increase by at least 10 percent, ordered by 2015 MMEs. You can export this table. Keep in mind that the prescription data reflects where prescriptions were dispensed, not where recipients live.

Data should be attributed to the CDC, based on raw prescription data obtained from QuintilesIMS, a pharmaceutical analytics company. Please give The Associated Press a contributing line on any story or graphic produced from this data distribution.

Caveats

• The county-level data reflects where an opioid is dispensed. Some of these prescriptions may have been obtained by people outside the county.

• Some counties did not have data robust enough for CDC to analyze. Of the 3,143 counties in the U.S., 180 counties did not have 2015 per-capita MME data that could be used. Still more counties did not have 2010 data. In all, the CDC was able to calculate a per-capita MME for both years in 2,734 counties.

• The data do not take into account illegal use of opiate drugs such as heroin.

• The data do not reflect drugs dispensed directly by a medical provider.

• Cold and cough products containing opioids and buprenorphine products indicated for conditions other than pain were excluded.

• The data does not include any details on the appropriateness of the prescriptions, or whether the opioids were dispensed for chronic, acute or end-of-life pain.

• The MME is calculated on an annual basis per capita. The CDC used American Community Survey data for population. Population estimates include all people in a county, including children.

AP Coverage of the Opioid Epidemic

The Associated Press has an ongoing series, Overcoming Opioids, running through this year, chronicling efforts to climb out of the worst drug epidemic in U.S. history. For earlier parts of this series, see: https://apnews.com/tag/OvercomingOpioids

If you have any questions about this data or its use, leave a comment in the discussion forum here or email Data Journalist Meghan Hoyer at mhoyer@ap.org

Abstract (en): The Monitoring the Future (MTF) project is a long-term epidemiologic and etiologic study of substance use among the nation's youth and adults. It is conducted at the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, funded by a series of investigator-initiated research grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. From its inception in 1975, the project has collected data annually from nationally representative samples of 13,000-19,000 high school seniors, located in approximately 135 schools nationwide (i.e. cross-sectional data). Beginning in 1991, similar surveys of nationally representative samples of 8th and 10th graders have been conducted annually. In all, approximately 45,000 students annually respond to about 100 drug use and demographic questions, as well as to about 200 additional questions divided among multiple forms on other topics such as attitudes toward government, social institutions, race relations, changing gender roles, educational aspirations, occupational aims, and marital plans. The MTF project also includes a longitudinal panel study component. Beginning with the class of 1976, biennial follow-up mail surveys have been conducted with representative subsamples of respondents from each senior year class, spanning modal ages 19 to 30. From each senior year cohort, a sample of about 2,450 students are selected for longitudinal follow-up. The sample is randomly split into two halves (approx. 1,225 each) to be followed every other year. One half-sample begins its first follow-up the next year at modal age 19, and the other half-sample begins its first follow-up in the second year at modal age 20. The follow-ups continue such that the modal ages are as follows: FU1=19/20, FU2=21/22, FU3=23/24, FU4=25/26, FU5=27/28, FU6=29/30. Respondents receive the same survey form for follow-up as they completed at base year. More information about the MTF project can be accessed through the Monitoring the Future website - including the purpose, design, sampling procedures, and questionnaire administration; selected data tables and figures; a listing of publications and press releases; information about the research investigators; and links to related websites. Response Rates: For information regarding response rates, users should refer to the summary information in Appendix A of the MTF Restricted Panel Data User's Guide. Datasets:DS1: Dataset Young adult follow-up of the U.S. high school seniors in MTF in the year of the baseline interview. The nationally-representative base year cohort sample (i.e. each high school senior class) was selected using a multistage area probability sample design involving three selection stages: (1) geographic areas or primary sampling units (PSUs), (2) schools (or linked groups of schools) within PSUs, and (3) students within sampled schools. Participants were randomly divided into two groups for biennial follow-up. For longitudinal follow-up, each year, 2,450 respondents to the 12th grade survey were selected. The panel sample was selected within school by form and gender, and each base-year school was required to have a minimum of two follow-up selections (individuals). The base year sampling weight was factored into the targeted sample size for each school/form/gender combination. An illicit drug user/nonuser stratification was created, based on responses to nine base year questions about 30-day drug use. (An individual was considered a "user" if they reported any use of LSD, hallucinogens other than LSD, cocaine, amphetamines, sedatives/barbiturates, tranquilizers, heroin, or narcotics other than heroin, or used marijuana 20 or more times in the past 30 days.) Illicit drug users were sampled at a 3-to-1 rate relative to non-users. Please see the MTF Restricted Panel Data User's Guide for additional sampling details. 2018-05-11 Collection was updated to correct error in documentation. Funding insitution(s): United States Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA001411, DA016575). mail questionnaire on-site questionnaire

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.

This data collection contains county-level counts of arrests and offenses for Part I offenses (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, auto theft, and arson) and counts of arrests for Part II offenses (forgery, fraud, embezzlement, vandalism, weapons violations, sex offenses, drug and alcohol abuse violations, gambling, vagrancy, curfew violations, and runaways).

This study had four key goals. The first goal was to identify how many women in the United States and in college settings have ever been raped or sexually assaulted during their lifetime and within the past year. The next goal was to identify key case characteristics of drug-facilitated and forcible rapes. The third goal was to examine factors that affect the willingness of women to report rape to law enforcement or seek help from their support network. The last goal was to make comparisons between the different types of rape. Part 1 (General Population) data consisted of a national telephone household sample of 3,001 United States women, whereas Part 2 (College Population) data consisted of 2,000 college women selected from a reasonably representative national list of women attending four year colleges and universities. Both data parts contain the same 399 variables. Interviews were completed between January 23 and June 26, 2006. Respondents were asked questions regarding risk perception, fear of violence, and accommodation behavior. The women were also asked their opinions and attitudes about reporting rape to the authorities and disclosing rape to family members, peers, or other individuals. This includes questions about barriers to reporting and experiences that women have had being the recipient of a disclosure from a friend, relative, or other individual. The respondents were asked a series of questions about rape, including different types of forcible, drug- or alcohol-facilitated, and incapacitated rape. For women who endorsed one or more rape experiences, a wide range of rape characteristics were assessed including characteristics around the nature of the event, perpetrator-victim relationship, occurrence of injury, involvement of drugs or alcohol, receipt of medical care, and whether the rape was reported to the authorities. The respondents were also asked a series of questions regarding substance use, including prescription and illegal drugs and alcohol. Additionally, a series of questions related to post-traumatic stress disorder and depression were asked. Finally, the women were asked to provide basic demographic information such as age, race, ethnicity, and income.