Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28535162›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2017

Examining the Social Context of Injection Drug Use: Social Proximity to Persons Who Inject Drugs Versus Geographic Proximity to Persons Who Inject Drugs.

Abby E Rudolph, April M Young, Jennifer R Havens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Using Network and Spatial Data to Better Target Overdose Prevention Strategies in Rural Appalachia.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2019
    Article
  19. Review
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.

Abby E Rudolph
April M Young
Jennifer R Havens

Funding

Examining the Impact of the Twin Epidemics of Methamphetamine and Opioid Use on Overdose, Risky Sex and Treatment Engagement among PWUD in Two Rural Appalachian CohortsR01DA033862 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI Jennifer R Havens · 2012 to 2026
$6.9M
Social networks and HIV risk among rural drug usersR01DA024598 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI HAVENS, JENNIFER R · 2008 to 2012
$2.6M
HIV and Substance Abuse Epidemiology among IDUs: Structural and Network Risk FactK01DA033879 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI RUDOLPH, ABBY ELISE · 2012 to 2016
$877k
NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA033879NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA024598NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA033862
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this analysis, we used social network and spatial data to examine associations between people's drug injection status and their social and/or spatial proximity to others who injected drugs. We recruited 503 rural Kentucky residents who used drugs to participate in the Social Networks among Appalachian People (SNAP) Study (2008-2010). Interviewer-administered surveys collected information on recent (past 6 months) sex, drug-use, and social-support network members (n = 897 ties). Using network simulations, we determined a threshold for the association between social proximity to others who injected drugs and recent injection status ("socially proximal" was defined by a shortest path ≤2). We defined "geographically proximal" as the median road-network distance between pairs of individuals who both injected drugs (≤7 miles (≤11.2 km)). Logistic regression was used to determine the independent and joint associations between the number of socially and/or geographically proximal injecting peers and a person's injection status. After adjustment, the odds of recent injection increased by 0.4% for each injecting peer who was geographically proximal but not socially proximal, 12% for each geographically and socially proximal injecting peer, and 22% for each injecting peer who was socially proximal but not geographically proximal. When implementing network-based interventions which promote cessation of injection drug use, investigators should consider collecting sociometric network data to examine whether the intervention diffuses through the network and whether there are additive or threshold effects.

Indexed as

Social SupportSpatial AnalysisSubstance Abuse, IntravenousAdultFemaleGeography, MedicalHumansKentuckyMaleMultivariate Analysishomophily; injection drug use; shortest path; social network analysis; social networks; spatial analysis

Identifiers

PMID28535162
PMCPMC6075186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.