Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37454608›Full record

ArticleThe International journal on drug policy2023

Decriminalization thresholds for drug possession: A multi-criteria policy analysis framework.

Erica McAdam, Will Small, Garth Mullins, Brittany Graham, Alissa Greer, Natahnee Winder, Kora DeBeck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The International journal on drug policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Erica McAdamBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, 400-1045 Howe St., Vancouver, BC V6Z 2A9, Canada; School of Public Policy, Simon Fraser University, 515 West Hastings St., Vancouver, BC V6B 5K3, Canada. Electronic address: erica.mcadam@bccsu.ubc.ca.
Will SmallBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, 400-1045 Howe St., Vancouver, BC V6Z 2A9, Canada; Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada.
Garth MullinsVancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU), Vancouver, BC, Canada; BC Association of People on Opioid Maintenance (BCAPOM), Vancouver, BC, Canada; Crackdown Podcast, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Brittany GrahamVancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU), Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Alissa GreerSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada.
Natahnee WinderSchool of Public Policy, Simon Fraser University, 515 West Hastings St., Vancouver, BC V6B 5K3, Canada; Department of Indigenous Studies, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada.
Kora DeBeckBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use, 400-1045 Howe St., Vancouver, BC V6Z 2A9, Canada; School of Public Policy, Simon Fraser University, 515 West Hastings St., Vancouver, BC V6B 5K3, Canada.

Funding

Vancouver Drug Users Study: The Impacts of Evolving Drug Use Patterns on HIV/AIDSU01DA038886 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA · PI DEBECK, KORA, HAYASHI, KANNA · 2015 to 2024
$12.1M
NIDA NIH HHS U01 DA038886
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecriminalization of personal possession of drugs has been proposed as an approach to mitigate the harms of drug prohibition. Despite growing interest, particularly in Canadian settings, analyses of approaches to defining the parameters of what constitutes personal possession within decriminalization models are lacking. Using the Province of British Columbia, Canada, as a case study, we undertook an evidence-based multi-criteria policy analysis of three models for defining personal possession: 1) a model that defines personal possession as the absence of evidence of drug trafficking; 2) a cumulative threshold of 15 grams; and 3) a cumulative threshold of 2.5 grams.

methodsWe utilized data from four sources: qualitative interviews with 16 experts, including representatives from government and law enforcement; Vancouver Police drug seizure data; self-reported drug consumption data from longitudinal cohorts of people who use drugs in Vancouver; and publicly available government documents (e.g., the Government of BC's submission for decriminalization). Data was used to identify and define evaluation criteria which reflect the stated policy objectives of decriminalization alongside other policy considerations. This framework was used to conduct a multi-criteria policy analysis of the three different models.

resultsThe seven evaluation criteria included: 1) reduction in interactions with police; 2) reduction of police drug seizures; 3) coverage for those with high consumption; 4) impact on equity-deserving groups; and acceptance on the part key stakeholders, including: 5) people who use drugs; 6) law enforcement; and 7) the public. The model that performed the best was the cumulative threshold model of 15 grams.

conclusionFindings highlight that different threshold models advance and constrain the stated policy objectives of drug decriminalization to varying degrees. This analysis provides a framework that other jurisdictions considering decriminalization could use to help inform determinations of threshold levels based on stated policy objectives.

Indexed as

Law EnforcementPolicy MakingBritish ColumbiaHumansPolicePolicyDecriminalizationDecriminalization modelDrug policyDrug possessionThresholds

Identifiers

PMID37454608
PMCPMC10529211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.