Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21050465›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2010

Surviving crack: a qualitative study of the strategies and tactics developed by Brazilian users to deal with the risks associated with the drug.

Luciana A Ribeiro, Zila M Sanchez, Solange A Nappo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
17.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

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

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

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

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

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

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Contingency management is effective in promoting abstinence and retention in treatment among crack cocaine users in Brazil: A randomized controlled trial.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2016
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Luciana A RibeiroUniversidade Federal de São Paulo/Psychobiology Department, Brazilian Center of Information of Psychotropic Drugs (CEBRID), Rua Napoleão de Barros, 925 - Vila Clementino, São Paulo, Brazil. luciana.abeid@unifesp.br
Zila M Sanchez
Solange A Nappo
Brazilian Institute of Neuropsychology and Behaviour · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to marginalization, trafficking violence, conflicts with the police and organic and social psychological problems associated with the drug, crack is one of the most devastating drugs currently in use. However, there is evidence that some users manage to stay alive and active while using crack cocaine for many years, despite the numerous adversities and risks involved with this behavior. In this context, the aim of the present study was to identify the strategies and tactics developed by crack users to deal with the risks associated with the culture of use by examining the survival strategies employed by long-term users.

methodA qualitative research method was used involving semi-structured, in-depth interviews. Twenty-eight crack users fulfilling a pre-defined enrollment criterion were interviewed. This criterion was defined as the long-term use of crack (i.e., at least four years). The sample was selected using information provided by key informants and distributed across eight different supply chains. The interviews were literally transcribed and analyzed via content analysis techniques using NVivo-8 software.

resultsThere was diversity in the sample with regard to economic and education levels. The average duration of crack use was 11.5 years. Respondents believed that the greatest risks of crack dependence were related to the drug's psychological effects (e.g., cravings and transient paranoid symptoms) and those arising from its illegality (e.g., clashes with the police and trafficking). Protection strategies focused on the control of the psychological effects, primarily through the consumption of alcohol and marijuana. To address the illegality of the drug, strategies were developed to deal with dealers and the police; these strategies were considered crucial for survival.

conclusionsThe strategies developed by the respondents focused on trying to protect themselves. They proved generally effective, though they involved risks of triggering additional problems (e.g., other dependencies) in the long term.

Indexed as

Cocaine-Related DisordersAdultBrazilCrack CocaineCrimeFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRisk FactorsCrack Cocaine

Identifiers

PMID21050465
PMCPMC3091576
OpenAlexW1993634892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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