ArticleBMC public health2018
Evaluation of a local government "shelter and van" intervention to improve safety and reduce alcohol-related harm.
Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of interventions that impact alcohol and other drug-related harms in licensed entertainment settings and outdoor music festivals.Harm reduction journal · 2024Pooled it
- Impact and Return on Investment of the Take Kare Safe Space Program-A Harm Reduction Strategy Implemented in Sydney, Australia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The acceptability of alcohol intoxication management services to users: A mixed methods study.Drug and alcohol review · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe entertainment precincts of cities, while contributing to local economies, need to be carefully managed to mitigate harms. Individual behaviours and government regulation have typically been the foci of interventions aimed at reducing alcohol-related harm. Little is known about how changes to the built environment might influence alcohol-related harms in these settings. The aim of this study was to explore how a public shelter and a volunteer-funded and staffed mobile van in a regional city influenced perceptions of safety and reduction in alcohol-related harm.
methodsAn intrinsic case-study approach was used. Document reviews, qualitative interviews with 16 key informants (volunteers, licensees, police, local business owners, patrons, community members and security guards), observation, and secondary data analysis were conducted in 2016. A conceptual framework of the causative pathways linking the drivers of alcohol consumption with social and health outcomes was used to inform the analysis.
resultsThe shelter and van were frequently utilised but there was no significant association with a reduction in the proportion of alcohol-related hospital emergency department presentations or police incident reports. Occupational health and safety risks were identified for the volunteers which had no management plan.
conclusionsThe findings highlight the challenge faced by local governments/authorities wanting to provide community-based interventions to complement other evidence-based approaches to reduce alcohol-related harm. Local governments/authorities with restricted regulatory oversight need to collaborate with key agencies for targeted upstream and evidence-based alcohol prevention and management interventions before investing resources. Such approaches are critical for improving community safety as well as health and social outcomes in communities at greatest risk of alcohol-related harm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.