Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36927354›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2023

A scoping review of implementation considerations for harm reduction vending machines.

Erin Russell, Jessica Johnson, Zach Kosinski, Callie Kaplan, Nicole Barnes, Sean Allen, Emily Haroz

Open access · goldFull text readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
17.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Erin Russell, Baltimore, USA. erinhaas88@gmail.com.
Jessica Johnson, Baltimore, USA.
Zach Kosinski, Baltimore, USA.
Callie Kaplan, Baltimore, USA.
Nicole Barnes, Baltimore, USA.
Sean Allen, Baltimore, USA.
Emily Haroz, Baltimore, USA.
University of Baltimore · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunity-based harm reduction vending machines (HRVM) are not new to the field of public health; numerous countries have implemented them in response to the needs of people who use drugs over the last three decades. However, until recently, few existed in the United States. Given the rapidity with which communities are standing up harm reduction vending machines, there is a pressing need for a consolidated examination of implementation evidence. This scoping review summarizes existing literature using multiple implementation science frameworks.

methodsThe scoping review was conducted in five stages including (1) Identify the research question; (2) Identify relevant studies; (3) Select the publications based on inclusion/exclusion criteria; (4) Review and extract data; and, (5) Summarize results. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched and authors screened publications in English from any year. Data were extracted by applying implementation constructs from RE-AIM and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Both frameworks provided a useful lens through which to develop knowledge about the facilitators and barriers to HRVM implementation. The review is reported according to PRISMA guidelines.

resultsAfter applying the full inclusion and exclusion criteria, including the intervention of interest ("vending machines") and population of interest ("people who use drugs"), a total of 22 studies were included in the scoping review. None of the studies reported on race, making it difficult to retroactively apply a racial equity lens. Among those articles that examined effectiveness, the outcomes were mixed between clear effectiveness and inconclusive results. Evidence emerged, however, to address all CFIR constructs, and positive outcomes were observed from HRVM's after-hour availability and increased program reach. RECOMMENDATIONS: HRVM implementation best practices include maximizing accessibility up to 24 h, 7 days a week, offering syringe disposal options, ensuring capability of data collection, and allowing for anonymity of use. Organizations that implement HRVM should establish strong feedback loops between them, their program participants, and the broader community upfront. Considerations for future research include rigorous study designs to evaluate effectiveness outcomes (e.g. reduced drug overdose deaths) and examination of HRVM reach among ethnic and racial communities.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionSubstance-Related DisordersDrug UsersHumansUnited StatesHarm reductionHIV preventionImplementation scienceNaloxoneOverdose prevention

Identifiers

PMID36927354
PMCPMC10018614
OpenAlexW4327685817

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read2
measurements read2
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.