ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)
Contingency Management and SARS-CoV-2 Testing Among People Who Inject Drugs.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). 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.
- A mixed methods evaluation of a motivational enhancement intervention to increase SARS-CoV-2 testing among people experiencing houselessness and people who inject drugs.Psychological services · 2025Trial
- Preliminary Efficacy of a Theory-Informed Intervention to Increase COVID-19 Testing Uptake Among People Who Inject Drugs in San Diego County: Findings From a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2023Trial
- Colocation of COVID-19 Vaccination Services at Syringe Service Programs for People Who Inject Drugs and People Experiencing Houselessness in Oregon.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974) · 2024Article
- Vaccine decision making among people who inject drugs: Improving on the WHO's 3C model of vaccine hesitancy.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Article
- A Brief Peer-Led Intervention to Increase COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among People Who Inject Drugs in San Diego County: Results From a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Harnessing the Power of Community-Engaged Science to Facilitate Access and Uptake of COVID-19 Testing: RADx-UP.American journal of public health · 2022Article
- COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs in Tijuana Mexico.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The IMPACT (Infection Management Plus Addiction Care Together) Pilot: A Case Series of Combined Contingency Management for Substance Use Disorders and Antibiotic Adherence in the Hospital Setting.Journal of addiction medicineArticle
- A Systems Perspective of How Community-Engaged Public Health Addresses Social Determinants of Health: A Case Study of a Population-Based COVID-19 Testing Program.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPeople who inject drugs (PWID) are especially vulnerable to morbidity and mortality as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection because of social and physical health vulnerabilities. Routine testing for SARS-CoV-2 is critical to reduce transmission. Contingency management-the provision of tangible rewards to reinforce positive behavior-can promote the use of health services among PWID. Evidence is scarce on the utility of contingency management to promote SARS-CoV-2 testing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of contingency management to increase testing among PWID.
methodsSARS-CoV-2 testing was implemented at 9 syringe exchange program sites in partnership with an Oregon-based nonprofit organization for 5 weeks without contingency management and for 6 weeks with contingency management (a $10 financial incentive for testing) from February 1 through mid-April 2021. We measured rates of testing among syringe exchange program clients before and after implementation of contingency management.
resultsBefore contingency management, SARS-CoV-2 testing occurred during approximately 131 of 1410 (9.3%) client encounters, and 123 of 997 (12.3%) unique clients were tested. During contingency management, testing occurred during approximately 571 of 1756 (32.5%) client encounters, and 407 of 1151 (35.4%) unique clients were tested. Rates of testing increased from 0.04 (SD, 0.04) before contingency management implementation to 0.25 (SD, 0.15) after implementation (
conclusionsContingency management facilitated uptake of SARS-CoV-2 testing among PWID. Contingency management may be an effective strategy for improving communicable disease testing beyond testing for SARS-CoV-2 and for improving vaccine uptake among PWID and warrants additional research.
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.