Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28606093›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2017

Two steps forward, one step back: current harm reduction policy and politics in the United States.

Ethan Nadelmann, Lindsay LaSalle

Abstract read
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 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 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. 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

2 authors.

Ethan NadelmannDrug Policy Alliance, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1426, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA.
Lindsay LaSalleDrug Policy Alliance, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1426, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA. llasalle@drugpolicy.org.ORCID 0000-0003-3022-5406

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Harm reduction policies and attitudes in the United States have advanced substantially in recent years but still lag behind more advanced jurisdictions in Europe and elsewhere. The Obama administration, particularly in its last years, embraced some harm reduction policies that had been rejected by previous administrations but shied away from more cutting edge interventions like supervised consumption sites and heroin-assisted treatment. The Trump administration will undermine some of the progress made to date but significant state and local control over drug policies in the US, as well as growing Republican support for pragmatic drug policies, motivated in part by the opioid crisis, ensures continuing progress for harm reduction.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionPublic PolicyAnalgesics, OpioidHeroinHeroin DependenceHumansLegislation, MedicalMarijuana AbuseNeedle-Exchange ProgramsPoliticsUnited StatesAnalgesics, OpioidHeroinCannabisConsumptionEnforcementObamaOpioidOverdosePoliciesTreatmentTrumpUnited States

Identifiers

PMID28606093
PMCPMC5469032

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.