Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32005119›Full record

SynthesisHarm reduction journal2020

What constitutes effective problematic substance use treatment from the perspective of people who are homeless? A systematic review and meta-ethnography.

Hannah Carver, Nicola Ring, Joanna Miler, Tessa Parkes

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Harm reduction journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Sur la route des surdoses: un portrait canadien.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Hannah CarverSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, 4T26, RG Bomont Building, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK. hannah.carver@stir.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6846-2661
Nicola RingSchool of Health and Social Care, Sighthill Campus, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, EH11 4BN, UK.
Joanna MilerSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, 4T26, RG Bomont Building, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK.
Tessa ParkesSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, 4T26, RG Bomont Building, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople experiencing homelessness have higher rates of problematic substance use but difficulty engaging with treatment services. There is limited evidence regarding how problematic substance use treatment should be delivered for these individuals. Previous qualitative research has explored perceptions of effective treatment by people who are homeless, but these individual studies need to be synthesised to generate further practice-relevant insights from the perspective of this group.

methodsMeta-ethnography was conducted to synthesise research reporting views on substance use treatment by people experiencing homelessness. Studies were identified through systematic searching of electronic databases (CINAHL; Criminal Justice Abstracts; Health Source; MEDLINE; PsycINFO; SocINDEX; Scopus; and Web of Science) and websites and were quality appraised. Original participant quotes and author interpretations were extracted and coded thematically. Concepts identified were compared to determine similarities and differences between studies. Findings were translated (reciprocally and refutationally) across studies, enabling development of an original over-arching line-of-argument and conceptual model.

resultsTwenty-three papers published since 2002 in three countries, involving 462 participants, were synthesised. Findings broadly related, through personal descriptions of, and views on, the particular intervention components considered effective to people experiencing homelessness. Participants of all types of interventions had a preference for harm reduction-oriented services. Participants considered treatment effective when it provided a facilitative service environment; compassionate and non-judgemental support; time; choices; and opportunities to (re)learn how to live. Interventions that were of longer duration and offered stability to service users were valued, especially by women. From the line-of-argument synthesis, a new model was developed highlighting critical components of effective substance use treatment from the service user's perspective, including a service context of good relationships, with person-centred care and an understanding of the complexity of people's lives.

conclusionThis is the first meta-ethnography to examine the components of effective problematic substance use treatment from the perspective of those experiencing homelessness. Critical components of effective problematic substance use treatment are highlighted. The way in which services and treatment are delivered is more important than the type of treatment provided. Substance use interventions should address these components, including prioritising good relationships between staff and those using services, person-centred approaches, and a genuine understanding of individuals' complex lives.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionAnthropology, CulturalHumansIll-Housed PersonsSubstance-Related DisordersHomelessnessInclusion healthInterventionsMeta-ethnographyQualitativeSubstance useTreatment

Identifiers

PMID32005119
PMCPMC6995160

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.