Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36138440›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2022

Challenges for drug checking services in Scotland: a qualitative exploration of police perceptions.

Danilo Falzon, Elizabeth V Aston, Hannah Carver, Wendy Masterton, Bruce Wallace, Harry Sumnall, Fiona Measham, Emma Fletcher, Rosalind Gittins, Saket Priyadarshi and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

11 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Danilo FalzonSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK. d.c.falzon@stir.ac.uk.
Elizabeth V AstonSchool of Applied Sciences, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
Hannah CarverSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Wendy MastertonSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Bruce WallaceSchool of Social Work, University of Victoria, STN CSC, PO Box 1700, Victoria, BC, Canada.
Harry SumnallPublic Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Fiona MeashamDepartment of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Emma FletcherNHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Rosalind GittinsClinical Department, Humankind Charity, Durham, UK.
Saket PriyadarshiNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.
Tessa ParkesSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
University of Stirling · GBEdinburgh Napier University · GBLiverpool John Moores University · GBNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde · GBNHS Tayside · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Victoria · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe impact of policing practices on the engagement of people who use drugs (PWUD) with harm reduction services is well evidenced. Although the police have traditionally taken an enforcement role in responding to drug use, it is increasingly clear that they can play an important part in multiagency delivery of harm reduction interventions. Despite this, there have been no studies exploring police officer perceptions of drug checking services (DCS), which provide analytical testing of client drug samples alongside harm reduction support and advice.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 police officers to explore the policing and legal challenges which could be encountered in the delivery of DCS in Scotland.

resultsParticipants expressed general support for DCS and described this support as part of a wider organisational shift towards public health-oriented policing. Participants also discussed different potential approaches to the policing of areas surrounding DCS including: formal limits on police presence around the service and/or stop and search powers in relation to personal possession; the effective decriminalisation of personal possession within a specified boundary around the service; and informal agreements between local divisions and DCS outlining expected policing practices. Any formal limitation on the capacity of police officers to respond to community concerns was viewed as problematic and as having the potential to erode public confidence in policing. Participants also highlighted the potential for frontline officers to utilise discretion in ways which could undermine public health goals. Legislative change, or national strategic guidance from relevant stakeholders, was seen as a means of providing 'cover', enabling local divisions to support the operation of drug checking.

conclusionsDespite a small sample of participants, this study summarises key challenges to be addressed in the implementation and operation of DCS in Scotland, and more widely. The paper concludes with suggested opportunities to develop approaches to policing that can facilitate rather than impede implementation and operation of these services.

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical ServicesSubstance-Related DisordersHarm ReductionHumansLaw EnforcementPolicePublic HealthCommunity basedCriminalisationDrug checkingDrug useHarm reductionPolicingPublic healthQualitativeScotlandStop and search

Identifiers

PMID36138440
PMCPMC9502919
OpenAlexW4296808937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.