Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31201133›Full record

Observational studyThe Lancet. Public health2019

The effect of entry and retention in opioid agonist treatment on contact with the criminal justice system among opioid-dependent people: a retrospective cohort study.

Natasa Gisev, Chrianna Bharat, Sarah Larney, Timothy Dobbins, Don Weatherburn, Matthew Hickman, Michael Farrell, Louisa Degenhardt

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The Lancet. Public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The effect of take-home naloxone kits on opioid-related deaths in Alberta, Canada: An ecological analysis.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Natasa GisevNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: n.gisev@unsw.edu.au.
Chrianna BharatNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sarah LarneyNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Timothy DobbinsNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Don WeatherburnNew South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Matthew HickmanPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Michael FarrellNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Louisa DegenhardtNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

Using existing data to understand and ameliorate risk in opioid agonist therapyR01DA044170 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES · PI DEGENHARDT, LOUISA · 2017 to 2019
$641k
Medical Research Council MR/K023233/1NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA044170
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence on the effectiveness of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in reducing crime is mixed. We aimed to assess the effect of OAT on crime in terms of delaying time to first charge and reducing overall charge rates, as well as the relationship between OAT retention and overall charge rates.

methodsWe did a retrospective cohort study of opioid-dependent people who entered OAT for the first time between Jan 1, 2004, and Dec 30, 2010, in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. We used three linked NSW and national administrative datasets. Data on OAT were obtained from the Pharmaceutical Drugs of Addiction System, data on charges were obtained from the Reoffending Database, and data on mortality were obtained from the National Death Index. The cohort was followed up until Dec 31, 2011. Time-dependent OAT exposure was modelled using Cox proportional hazards models (time to first charge) and Andersen-Gill intensity models (total charge-days). Retention in OAT was modelled using two features of treatment engagement, number of OAT episodes and proportion of follow-up time in OAT (presented in quartile groupings: lowest, low-mid, low-high, highest) using zero-inflated negative binomial regression (total charges). All models were adjusted for sociodemographic, criminographic, and treatment-related variables.

findings10 744 new OAT entrants were included in the study. 5751 (53·5%) people were charged with an offence. In adjusted analyses, OAT was associated with an initial benefit in delaying the time to first charge (hazard ratio 0·43, 95% CI 0·33-0·55) and reducing total charge-days (0·39, 95% CI 0·30-0·52); however, these protective effects reduced over time. Total charge rates were higher as the number of OAT episodes increased (incident rate ratio [IRR] 1·13, 95% CI 1·11-1·15), and when relatively lower proportions of time were spent in OAT (IRR among the lowest three quartiles ranged from 1·11 [95% CI 1·02-1·21] to 1·22 [95% CI 1·12-1·33]).

interpretationOAT was associated with a reduction in overall charge rates and was more protective as treatment engagement increased. Maximising treatment retention is crucial to achieving long-term health and social benefits of OAT.

fundingAustralian National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Australian Government Department of Health, UNSW Sydney.

Indexed as

AdultAnalgesics, OpioidCriminal LawFemaleHumansMaleNew South WalesOpiate Substitution TreatmentOpioid-Related DisordersRetention in CareRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID31201133
PMCPMC6673674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.