ArticleHarm reduction journal2021
Peer-assisted injection as a harm reduction measure in a supervised consumption service: a qualitative study of client experiences.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing the patient journey: Insights from early implementation of long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine in four urban Ryan White-funded clinics in the United States.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2026Article
- Benefits and barriers: a rapid-ethnographic study on the perspectives of potential and actual clients of Athens' drug consumption room.Harm reduction journal · 2026Article
- Resident and staff experiences of structural barriers to a housing-based overdose prevention site in Vancouver, Canada: "There is a double standard if you smoke".Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2025Article
- Low Earth Orbit Communication Satellites: A Positively Disruptive Technology That Could Change the Delivery of Health Care in Rural and Northern Canada.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Four decades of overdose prevention centres: lessons for the future from a realist review.Harm reduction journal · 2025Review
- Scaling up hepatitis C testing and linkage-to-care among people who use drugs: lessons learned from a pilot project implemented at a supervised consumption site.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Overdose prevention centres as spaces of safety, trust and inclusion: A causal pathway based on a realist review.Drug and alcohol review · 2024Review
- Radical hospitality: Innovative programming to build community and meet the needs of people who use drugs at a government-sanctioned overdose prevention site in San Francisco, California.The International journal on drug policy · 2024Article
- "Shared experience makes this all possible": documenting the guiding principles of peer-led services for people released from prison.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Context and correlates of providing assistance with someone's first injection in the AIDS linked to the IntraVenous Experience cohort, Baltimore, MD.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2023Article
- Women who use drugs: engagement in practices of harm reduction care.Harm reduction journal · 2023Article
- Between Care and Control: Examining Surveillance Practices in Harm Reduction.Contemporary drug problems · 2023Article
- Injecting drugs alone during an overdose crisis in Vancouver, Canada.Harm reduction journal · 2022Article
- Concurrent use of opioids and stimulants and risk of fatal overdose: A cohort study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Establishment and Enforcement of Operational Rules at an Unsanctioned Safe Drug Consumption Site in the United States, 2014-2020.American journal of public health · 2022Article
- Factors associated with injury and blood-borne infection risk when providing assisted injection among people who inject drugs.The International journal on drug policy · 2021Article
- Assisted injection within supervised injection services: Uptake and client characteristics among people who require help injecting in a Canadian setting.The International journal on drug policy · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeer assistance is an emerging area of study in injection drug use. When Canada's first supervised consumption site (SCS) opened in 2003 in Vancouver, Canada, clients were prohibited from injecting their peers; only recently has this practise been introduced as a harm reduction measure at these sites. In 2018, Health Canada granted federal exemption to allow peer-assisted injection at certain SCS sites, under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Literature pertaining to peer-assisted injection addresses several topics: interpersonal relationships between the injection provider and recipient; the role of pragmatism; trust and expertise; and gender relations.
methodsIn this qualitative study, participants (n = 16) were recruited to be interviewed about their experiences in a peer-assisted injection program (PAIP) at one SCS regulated by Health Canada. Interview data were transcribed and thematically analyzed. Quantitative administrative data were used to provide context and to describe the study population, comprised of people in the PAIP (n = 248).
resultsPAIP clients made up 17.4% of all SCS clients. PAIP clients were more likely to be female and Indigenous. Injection providers expressed being moved by compassion to help others inject. While their desire to assist was pragmatic, they felt a significant burden of responsibility for the outcomes. Other prominent factors related to the injection provider-recipient relationship were social connection, trust, safety, social capital, and reciprocity. Participants also made suggestions for improving the PAIP which included adding more inhalation rooms so that if someone was unable to inject they could smoke in a safe place instead. Additionally, being required by law to divide drugs outside of the SCS, prior to preparing and using in the site, created unsafe conditions for clients.
conclusionsRegular use of the SCS, and access to its resources, enabled participants to lower their risk through smoking and to practice lower-risk injections. At the federal level, there is considerable room to advocate for allowing clients to divide drugs safely within the SCS, and to increase capacity for safer alternatives such as inhalation.
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.