Hieu-Pham/cpgQA huggingface dataset:
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: What percentage of people entering SUD treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid in the 1960s?
Answer: 80%
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: What percentage of people entering SUD treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid in the 2000s?
Answer: 75%
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: What was the first opioid used by most of the people entering SUD treatment for heroin use in the 1960s?
Answer: heroin
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: What was the first opioid used by most of the people entering SUD treatment for heroin use in the 2000s?
Answer: prescription opioids
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: What called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and its treatment protocols?
Answer: increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: Where can further information on SUD treatment be found?
Answer: the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG)
Background information

Concurrent with the increase in prescription opioid use, the rate of heroin overdose deaths increased  nearly four-fold between 2000 and 2013. According to a survey of patients entering SUD treatment for  heroin use, the prescription opioid epidemic has resulted in a marked shift in how and which opioids are  abused. In the 1960s, 80% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using heroin as their first opioid, while in the 2000s, 75% of people entering treatment for heroin use started using prescription opioids as their first opioid. This increase in the use of opioids, as well as associated morbidity, mortality, and other adverse outcomes, has called attention to the need for a paradigm shift in pain and in the way it is treated. Consult the VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (VA/DoD SUD CPG) for further information. 

Question: What is VA/DoD SUD CPG?
Answer: VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Substance Use Disorders
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: In which way the U.S. is in the midst of cultural transformation?
Answer: in the way pain is viewed and treated
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: What is the trend in pain management and care in the U.S.?
Answer: The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: What happens in the biomedical model of pain care?
Answer: the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: What is the aim of the pain treatment in the biomedical model of pain care?
Answer: fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: Which was the dominating period of the biomedical model of pain care?
Answer: the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: Why did the National Academy of Medicine issue a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model?
Answer: As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent
Background information

The U.S. is in the midst of a cultural transformation in the way pain is viewed and treated. The biomedical model of pain care, in which the pain experience is reduced to a pain generator and pain treatment is aimed at fixing or numbing pain with medications, interventions, or surgery, dominated the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s. As the cost, potential harm, and limited effectiveness of the approach in the biomedical model of pain care to chronic pain was becoming apparent, the National Academy of Medicine issued a call for the transformation of pain care to a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model.

Question: Which model was adopted after the biomedical model of pain care?
Answer: a biopsychosocial, multimodal, interdisciplinary model
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: What happened concurrently with the transformation in pain care?
Answer: A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: How was OT used prior to 1980s?
Answer: rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: Name the concerning factors regarding the use of OT prior to 1980s.
Answer: tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: How did OT increasingly become a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain?
Answer: As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: Which efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain?
Answer: Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: Which became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s?
Answer: Chronic pain management
Background information

A paradigm shift in the use of OT for chronic non-terminal pain has paralleled this transformation in pain  care. Prior to the 1980s, OT was rarely used outside of severe acute injury or post-surgical pain, primarily due to concern for tolerance, physical dependence, and addiction. As the hospice and palliative care  movement began defining end-of-life care in the U.S. during the 1980s and emphasizing the importance of  pain relief, OT increasingly became a mainstay for cancer and end-of-life pain. Efforts to destigmatize the use of prescription opioids for chronic non-terminal pain encompassed primary care providers and the  public. The efforts led to an unprecedented increase in opioid prescribing for chronic non-terminal pain.  Chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s  with significant numbers of patients in pain clinics receiving LOT. Despite the absence of long-term safety or efficacy data, OT for chronic non-terminal pain became a mainstay of therapy. However, as observational and epidemiologic data of harm from LOT accumulated, a much more cautious approach to  OT for chronic non-terminal pain has emerged in the decade of the 2010s.

Question: When did chronic pain management became synonymous with LOT?
Answer: in the 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s