Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31174536›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2019

Co-design of harm reduction materials for people who inject drugs to implement research findings.

Deborah Hussey, Zoe Trinder-Widdess, Cassie Dee, Darren Bagnall, Tatty Bojangles, Joanna May Kesten

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Exploring the impact of engagement in mental health and substance use research: A scoping review and thematic analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Deborah HusseyBristol Drugs Project, 11 Brunswick Square, Bristol, BS2 8PE, UK.
Zoe Trinder-WiddessNational Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West (NIHR CLAHRC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Cassie DeeBristol Drugs Project, 11 Brunswick Square, Bristol, BS2 8PE, UK.
Darren BagnallBristol Drugs Project, 11 Brunswick Square, Bristol, BS2 8PE, UK.
Tatty BojanglesBristol Drugs Project, 11 Brunswick Square, Bristol, BS2 8PE, UK.
Joanna May KestenNational Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West (NIHR CLAHRC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK. Jo.Kesten@bristol.ac.uk.
At Bristol · GBBristol Health Partners · GBNational Institute for Health Research · GBUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Bristol Health Partners N/AEconomic and Social Research Council ES/M500410/1NIHR CLAHRC West N/ANIHR HPRU in Evaluation of Interventions N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEquipment used by people who inject drugs (PWID) either has a needle which is fixed to the syringe or can be detached and replaced. Detachable low dead space syringes (LDSS) have been developed, with less space between the needle and plunger (referred to as dead space) than traditional detachable equipment. This equipment can help protect PWID from harm of infection as less blood is transferred if equipment is shared. Our previous research found that detachable LDSS are likely to be acceptable to PWID, and we produced recommendations for their introduction in needle and syringe programmes (NSP) in the United Kingdom (UK). We held a national stakeholder meeting to discuss how to accelerate the pace and scale of the rollout and uptake of detachable LDSS. This commentary reflects on the involvement of PWID as co-designers of harm reduction materials to implement these research findings in a way that supports the uptake of LDSS equipment by NSP and service users. We present the user-centred design process, peer reflections on the project, and lessons learnt by the team working with the peers. MAIN BODY: Peers and stakeholders translated the research into easy to understand messages following a consultation with NSP across the UK. Working with Linnell Publications over three workshops, peers selected their preferred design style and informed the language, messages, and overall look of the designs. The peers ensured the designs avoided images and language with negative connotations, humour, and unequivocal language. Peers said that they found the process enjoyable and informative-leading to increased awareness of harm reduction practices. The facilitators took steps to ensure the views of the peers were heard throughout. They reflected on the importance of involving PWID meaningfully throughout the project. Without the peers, the designs would be less effective and engaging to their target audience.

conclusionWe conclude that placing peers at the heart of this research implementation project was essential to ensure the materials are appropriate and engaging and do not stigmatise or alienate the intended audience unintentionally. We recommend that others planning similar work include peers within the entire project to support their meaningful contribution.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionHealth EducationNeedle-Exchange ProgramsSubstance Abuse, IntravenousSyringesTeaching MaterialsEquipment DesignHumansImplementation ScienceNeedlesPatient Acceptance of Health CareStakeholder ParticipationUnited KingdomCo-designHarm reductionInvolvementLow dead space syringesNeedle and syringe programmesPeersPeople who inject drugs

Identifiers

PMID31174536
PMCPMC6555749
OpenAlexW2948599883

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.