ArticleAnnals of medicine2022
Applications of research evidence during processes to acquire approvals for syringe services program implementation in rural counties in Kentucky.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Perspectives About Public Health Vending Machine Implementation on an American Indian Reservation in the Northern Midwest, United States.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Estimating the Cost-Saving Threshold of a Rural Syringe Services Program Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- Perspectives of syringe services program operators in Michigan on their relationship with substance use treatment: a qualitative study.Harm reduction journal · 2025Article
- Lessons Learned Implementing Syringe Services Programs at Rural Health Departments in Kentucky.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- Were Needles Everywhere?: Differing Views on Syringe Waste and Disposal Associated With Needs-Based Syringe Services Programs Among Community Partners and Persons Who Inject Drugs.Substance use & misuse · 2024Article
- Perceptions of COVID-19 risk during the pandemic: perspectives from people seeking medication for opioid use disorder.Annals of medicine · 2023Article
- Factors associated with receptive injection equipment sharing among people who inject drugs: findings from a multistate study at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.Harm reduction journal · 2023Article
- Law enforcement and syringe services program implementation in rural counties in Kentucky: a qualitative exploration.Harm reduction journal · 2022Article
- Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on syringe services programs in rural Kentucky.Harm reduction journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDespite decades of empirical research in the US and internationally documenting the benefits of implementing syringe services programs (SSPs), their implementation may be controversial in many jurisdictions. Better understanding how research evidence is applied during SSP implementation processes may enable the public health workforce to advocate for program scale up. This study explores applications of research evidence during processes to acquire approvals for SSP implementation in rural counties in Kentucky.
methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted among eighteen stakeholders (e.g. health department directors, SSP operators) involved in SSP implementation in rural Kentucky counties. Stakeholders were asked to describe the contexts surrounding SSP implementation processes. Interviews were transcribed and analysed for applications of research evidence. Research evidence-related quotes were subsequently categorised based on the typologies for applications of research evidence developed by Weiss
resultsInstrumental applications of research evidence occurred at the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels to dispel concerns about SSPs and formed the basis for implementation support. SSP proponents used research evidence in a conceptual manner to address underlying attitudes and beliefs that were not evidence-based. Participants reported symbolic research evidence applications to justify pre-existing attitudes and beliefs about meeting the public health needs of people who inject drugs. Lastly, in some instances, research evidence was met with scepticism and an unwillingness to consider its merits.
conclusionApplications of research evidence during SSP implementation approval processes in rural Kentucky counties were heterogeneous in nature. Better understanding the diversity of ways in which research evidence may be employed during SSP implementation processes may support efforts to improve the public health of people who inject drugs.Key messagesApplications of research evidence during SSP implementation approval processes in rural Kentucky counties were heterogeneous in nature.Instrumental applications of research evidence occurred at the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels to dispel concerns about SSPs and formed the basis for implementation support.SSP proponents used research evidence in a conceptual manner to address underlying attitudes and beliefs that were not evidence-based.
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.