ArticleHarm reduction journal2023
Double counting of clients using services in Iran: implications for assessing the reach of harm reduction programs.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany people with high-risk sexual or injection behaviors use harm reduction services with different identities and are therefore counted more than once in client databases. This practice results in inaccurate statistics on the number of clients served and the effective reach of these services. This study aimed to determine the levels of double counting of clients of harm reduction services, including needle and syringe programs, condom distribution, HIV testing and counseling, and methadone maintenance in five cities in Iran.
methodsBetween September and March 2020, our study included 1630 clients, 115 staff of harm reduction centers, and 30 experts in the field of harm reduction in five cities in Iran. Clients of harm reduction services were asked about using harm reduction services multiple times at the same center or at different centers in the last year using different identities. Estimates of double counting derived from client responses were validated by panels of center staff and experts in harm reduction.
resultsSynthesizing data from clients, staff, and experts, the final estimates of double counting of clients using harm reduction services were: HIV testing 10% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0-15), needle and syringe programs 17% (95% CI 8.5-20), condom distribution programs 13% (95% CI 3-19), HIV/STI counseling 10% (95% CI 0-16), and methadone maintenance 7% (95% CI 2-10).
conclusionDouble counting of clients in harm reduction services in Iran is substantial. Data on clients reach by harm reduction services need to be corrected for double counting to improve program planning, client population size estimation, and efficient resource allocation.
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.