Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24722219›Full record

Trial reportHealth education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education2014

Community Impact of Pharmacy-Randomized Intervention to Improve Access to Syringes and Services for Injection Drug Users.

Natalie D Crawford, Silvia Amesty, Alexis V Rivera, Katherine Harripersaud, Alezandria Turner, Crystal M Fuller

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Addressing Disease-Related Stigma During Infectious Disease Outbreaks.Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Natalie D CrawfordGeorgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA nbeamer@gsu.edu.
Silvia AmestyColumbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Alexis V RiveraColumbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Katherine HarripersaudColumbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Alezandria TurnerColumbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Crystal M FullerColumbia University, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Pharmacy Referral Intervention: IDU Access to ServicesR01DA022144 · NIDA · NEW YORK ACADEMY OF MEDICINE · PI LEWIS, CRYSTAL FULLER · 2007 to 2010
$2.8M
Advancing PrEP in pharmacies COVID supplementR34MH119007 · NIMH · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI CRAWFORD, NATALIE D. · 2019 to 2023
$884k
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA022144NIMH NIH HHS R34 MH119007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn an effort to reduce HIV transmission among injection drug users (IDUs), New York State deregulated pharmacy syringe sales in 2001 through the Expanded Syringe Access Program by removing the requirement of a prescription. With evidence suggesting pharmacists' ability to expand their public health role, a structural, pharmacy-based intervention was implemented to determine whether expanding pharmacy practice to include provision of HIV risk reduction and social/medical services information during the syringe sale would (a) improve pharmacy staff attitudes toward IDUs (b) increase IDU syringe customers, and (c) increase prescription customer base in New York City neighborhoods with high burden of HIV and illegal drug activity.

methodsPharmacies (n = 88) were randomized into intervention (recruited IDU syringe customers into the study and delivered intervention activities), primary control (recruited IDU syringe customers only) and secondary control (did not recruit IDUs or deliver intervention activities) arms.

resultsPharmacy staff in the intervention versus secondary control pharmacies showed significant decreases in the belief that selling syringes to IDUs causes community loitering.

conclusionsStructural interventions may be optimal approaches for changing normative attitudes about highly stigmatized populations.

Indexed as

Drug UsersHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth Services AccessibilitySubstance Abuse, IntravenousSyringesHIV InfectionsHumansNew York CityPharmaciesPharmacistscommunity-based participatory researchhealth behaviorhealth disparitiesHIV/AIDSsubstance use

Identifiers

PMID24722219
PMCPMC10273324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.