{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03152173913043478, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008152173913043478, 'mean_word_length': 5.198653198653199, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
External Validation of the Medication Taper Complexity Score for Methadone Tapers in Children With Opioid Abstinence Syndrome

Background: Methadone is commonly prescribed for children with opioid abstinence syndrome (OAS) as a taper schedule over several days to weeks. The Medication Taper Complexity Score (MTCS) was developed to evaluate outpatient methadone tapers. Objective: To further validate the MTCS and determine if it is a reliable tool for clinicians to use to assess the complexity of methadone tapers for OAS. Methods: An expert panel of pediatric clinical pharmacists was convened. Panel members were provided 9 methadone tapers (ie, “easy,” “medium,” and “difficult”) to determine construct and face validity of the MTCS. The primary objective was to further establish reliability and construct/face validity of the MTCS. The secondary objective was to assess the reliability of the MTCS within and between tapers. Instrument reliability was assessed using a Pearson correlation coefficient; with 0.8 as the minimum acceptable coefficient. Construct (divergent) validity was assessed via a repeated-measures ANOVA analysis (Bonferroni post hoc analyses) of the mean scores provided by panel members. Results: Six panel members were recruited from various geographical locations. Panel members had 18.3 ± 5.5 years of experience, with practice expertise in general pediatrics, hematology/oncology, and the pediatric and neonatal intensive care unit. The MTCS had a reliability coefficient of .9949. There was vivid discrimination between the easy, medium, and difficult tapers; P = .001. The panel recommended minor modifications to the MTCS. Conclusions: The MTCS was found to be a reliable and valid tool. Overall, the panel felt that the MTCS was easy to use and had potential applications in both practice and research.