Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28494774›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2017

Expanding conceptualizations of harm reduction: results from a qualitative community-based participatory research study with people who inject drugs.

L M Boucher, Z Marshall, A Martin, K Larose-Hébert, J V Flynn, C Lalonde, D Pineau, J Bigelow, T Rose, R Chase and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Community Advisory Board Members Speak Out: Insights From an Opioid Overdose Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Balancing abstinence and harm reduction across the continuum of care for liver transplantation in alcohol-associated liver disease.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. People who use drugs and the right to health.Harm reduction journal · 2024
    Review
  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

13 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

L M BoucherÉlisabeth Bruyère Research Institute, 43 Bruyère Street, Annex E, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 5C8, Canada. liboucher@bruyere.org.
Z MarshallSocial Development Studies & School of Social Work, Renison University College, University of Waterloo, 240 Westmount Road North, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G4, Canada.
A MartinOttawa Hospital Research Institute, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1Y 4E9, Canada.
K Larose-HébertSchool of Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences, Laval University, Charles de Koninck Hall, 1030, avenue des Sciences-Humaines, Quebec, G1V 0A6, Canada.
J V FlynnDepartment of Social Work, University of Gothenburg, Sprängkullsgatan 23, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden.
C LalondePROUD Community Advisory Committee, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
D PineauPROUD Community Advisory Committee, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
J BigelowPROUD Community Advisory Committee, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
T RosePROUD Community Advisory Committee, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
R ChaseDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, 750 Bannatyne Ave, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3E 0W2, Canada.
R BoydSandy Hill Community Health Centre, 221 Nelson Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 1C7, Canada.
M TyndallBC Centre for Disease Control, 655 W 12th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 4R4, Canada.
C KendallDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 43 Bruyère Street, (375) Floor 3JB, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 5C8, Canada.
BC Centre for Disease Control · CAÉlisabeth Bruyère Hospital · CAOttawa Hospital · CARegent Park Community Health Centre · CAUniversité Laval · CAUniversity of Gothenburg · SEUniversity of Manitoba · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CAUniversity of Waterloo · CA

Funding

CIHR HCP-97106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe perspectives of people who use drugs are critical in understanding why people choose to reduce harm in relation to drug use, what practices are considered or preferred in conceptualizations of harm reduction, and which environmental factors interfere with or support the use of harm reduction strategies. This study explores how people who inject drugs (PWID) think about harm reduction and considers the critical imperative of equity in health and social services delivery for this community.

methodsThis community-based participatory research study was conducted in a Canadian urban centre. Using a peer-based recruitment and interviewing strategy, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted by and with PWID. The Vidaview Life Story Board, an innovative tool where interviewers and participant co-construct a visual "life-scape" using a board, markers, and customized picture magnets, was used to facilitate the interviews. The topics explored included injection drug use and harm reduction histories, facilitators and barriers to using harm reduction strategies, and suggestions for improving services and supports.

resultsTwenty-three interviews with PWID (14 men and 9 women) were analysed, with a median age of 50. Results highlighted an expanded conceptualization of harm reduction from the perspectives of PWID, including motivations for adopting harm reduction strategies and a description of harm reduction practices that went beyond conventional health-focused concerns. The most common personal practices that PWID used included working toward moderation, employing various cognitive strategies, and engaging in community activities. The importance of social or peer support and improving self-efficacy was also evident. Further, there was a call for less rigid eligibility criteria and procedures in health and social services, and the need to more adequately address the stigmatization of drug users.

conclusionsThese findings demonstrated that PWID incorporate many personal harm reduction practices in their daily lives to improve their well-being, and these practices highlight the importance of agency, self-care, and community building. Health and social services are needed to better support these practices because the many socio-structural barriers this community faces often interfere with harm reduction efforts. Finally, "one size does not fit all" when it comes to harm reduction, and more personalized or de-medicalized conceptualizations are recommended.

Indexed as

Drug UsersHarm ReductionCanadaCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSelf CareSubstance Abuse, IntravenousAgencyCommunity-based participatory researchCommunity engagementEquityHarm reductionHealth and social servicesInjection drug usePeople with lived experiencesSelf-care

Identifiers

PMID28494774
PMCPMC5427533
OpenAlexW2606842684

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.